Il conflitto tra ragione e passioni nel pensiero morale, economico e politico di Bernard Mandeville

Effects of the conflict between reason and passion in Bernard Mandeville’s moral, economic and political thought My PhD dissertation focuses on Bernard Mandeville (1670-1732), a Dutch philosopher who moved to London in his late twenties. The aspect of Mandeville’s thought I take into account in my research is the conflicting relation between reason and passions, and the consequences that Mandeville’s view of this conflict has in the development of his theory of human nature which, I argue, is what grounds his moral, economic and, above all, political theory. According to Mandeville, reason is fundamentally weak. Passions influence with more strength human actions, and, eventually, are the ones which motivate them. The role of reason is merely instrumental, restricted to finding appropriate means in order to reach the desired ends, which are capricious and inconstant, since they all come from unstable passions. Reason cannot take decisions meant to act in the long term, pursuing an object which has not a selfish and temporary nature. There is no possibility, thus, that men’s actions aim just to achieve a good and just society, without their interests being directly involved. The basically selfish root of every desire leads Mandeville to claim that there is neither benevolence nor altruism which guides human behaviour. Hence he expresses a judgement on the moral character of human beings, always busy with their self-satisfaction, and hardly ever considering what would be good on a wider perspective, including other people’s sake. The anthropological features ascribed to men by Mandeville, are those which lead him to prefer a political system where governors are not supposed to have particular abilities, either from an intellectual or from a moral point of view, and peace and order are preserved by the bureaucratic machine, which is meant to work with the least effort on the part of the politicians, and no big harm can be done even by corrupted or wicked governors. This system is adopted with an eye at remedying human deficiencies: Mandeville takes into primary account, when he thinks of how to build a peaceful and functioning society, that everyone is concerned with his selfish interest, and that the rationality of a single politician, or of a group of them belonging to a same generation, cannot find a good “solution” to govern men able to last over the long period, and to work in different ages. This implies a refusal of the Hobbesian theory of the pactum subjectionis, which has the character of a rational and definitive choice, and leads Mandeville to consider the order which arises spontaneously, without any plan or rational intervention.

Una grande narrazione del capitalismo: potere e scienze sociali nel pensiero politico di Daniel Bell

Questa tesi punta a ricostruire il pensiero politico di Bell tra il secondo dopoguerra e la metà degli anni Settanta. In tale arco cronologico, la riflessione politica di Bell si profila, per usare una formula di Jean-François Lyotard, come una «grande narrazione» del capitalismo. Nel complesso, cioè, l’opera di Bell appare come una storia sociologica del capitalismo, che nella fine delle ideologie registra l’apogeo del fordismo e, in seguito, ne mette in luce le trasformazioni in senso post-industriale, indagando le ricadute che tali mutamenti implicano sul piano dei rapporti di potere e della legittimazione del sistema. Nell’ottica di Bell, pertanto, il capitalismo non costituisce soltanto un sistema economico, ma la forma specifica attraverso cui si dispiega la società nel suo complesso, attivando una serie di rapporti di potere mediante i quali gli individui vengono coordinati e subordinati. Una siffatta concezione del capitalismo agisce immediatamente la questione del potere e solleva un interrogativo a esso connesso: «che cosa tiene insieme una società?». Una domanda che attraversa la traiettoria intellettuale di Bell e, sia pure declinata mediante una terminologia sociologica, riflette in realtà l’ambizione delle scienze sociali di farsi teoria politica. Esse si presentano quindi come teoria politica della modernità, nella misura in cui distinguono il potere sociale dal potere politico e, al tempo stesso, instaurano tra i due poli una tensione dialettica produttiva. Mettendo a fuoco la concettualizzazione del potere nell’opera di Bell si analizzeranno le mutazioni nel rapporto tra Stato e società negli Stati Uniti durante la Golden Age del capitalismo. In particolare, si metterà in luce nella grande narrazione di Bell l’ascesa e il declino di un ordine istituzionale che, alla metà degli anni Settanta, appare percorso da molteplici tensioni politiche e sociali che preannunciano l’avvento dell’età globale e il bisogno di una nuova “scala” di governo.

Capacita' e formazione nel liberalismo di Amartya Sen e Martha Nussbaum. Eredita' differenti del pensiero politico per una "cittadinanza del mondo"

Il presente lavoro di ricerca si propone di discutere il contributo che l’analisi dell’evoluzione storica del pensiero politico occidentale e non occidentale riveste nel percorso intellettuale compiuto dai fondatori della teoria contemporanea dell’approccio delle capacità, fondata e sistematizzata nei suoi contorni speculativi a partire dagli anni Ottanta dal lavoro congiunto dell’economista indiano Amartya Sen e della filosofa dell’Università di Chicago Martha Nussbaum. Ci si ripropone di dare conto del radicamento filosofico-politico del lavoro intellettuale di Amartya Sen, le cui concezioni economico-politiche non hanno mai rinunciato ad una profonda sensibilità di carattere etico, così come dei principali filoni intorno ai quali si è imbastita la versione nussbaumiana dell’approccio delle capacità a partire dalla sua ascendenza filosofica classica in cui assume una particolare primazia il sistema etico-politico di Aristotele. Il pensiero politico moderno, osservato sotto il prisma della riflessione sulla filosofia della formazione che per Sen e Nussbaum rappresenta la “chiave di volta” per la fioritura delle altre capacità individuali, si organizzerà intorno a tre principali indirizzi teorici: l’emergenza dei diritti positivi e sociali, il dibattito sulla natura della consociazione nell’ambito della dottrina contrattualista e la stessa discussione sui caratteri delle politiche formative. La sensibilità che Sen e Nussbaum mostrano nei confronti dell’evoluzione del pensiero razionalista nel subcontinente che passa attraverso teorici antichi (Kautylia e Ashoka) e moderni (Gandhi e Tagore) segna il tentativo operato dai teorici dell’approccio delle capacità di contrastare concezioni politiche contemporanee fondate sul culturalismo e l’essenzialismo nell’interpretare lo sviluppo delle tradizioni culturali umane (tra esse il multiculturalismo, il comunitarismo, il neorealismo politico e la teoria dei c.d. “valori asiatici”) attraverso la presa di coscienza di un corredo valoriale incentrato intorno al ragionamento rintracciabile (ancorché in maniera sporadica e “parallela”) altresì nelle tradizioni culturali e politiche non occidentali.

Essays on the political economy of European integration

Recently, a rising interest in political and economic integration/disintegration issues has been developed in the political economy field. This growing strand of literature partly draws on traditional issues of fiscal federalism and optimum public good provision and focuses on a trade-off between the benefits of centralization, arising from economies of scale or externalities, and the costs of harmonizing policies as a consequence of the increased heterogeneity of individual preferences in an international union or in a country composed of at least two regions. This thesis stems from this strand of literature and aims to shed some light on two highly relevant aspects of the political economy of European integration. The first concerns the role of public opinion in the integration process; more precisely, how economic benefits and costs of integration shape citizens' support for European Union (EU) membership. The second is the allocation of policy competences among different levels of government: European, national and regional. Chapter 1 introduces the topics developed in this thesis by reviewing the main recent theoretical developments in the political economy analysis of integration processes. It is structured as follows. First, it briefly surveys a few relevant articles on economic theories of integration and disintegration processes (Alesina and Spolaore 1997, Bolton and Roland 1997, Alesina et al. 2000, Casella and Feinstein 2002) and discusses their relevance for the study of the impact of economic benefits and costs on public opinion attitude towards the EU. Subsequently, it explores the links existing between such political economy literature and theories of fiscal federalism, especially with regard to normative considerations concerning the optimal allocation of competences in a union. Chapter 2 firstly proposes a model of citizens’ support for membership of international unions, with explicit reference to the EU; subsequently it tests the model on a panel of EU countries. What are the factors that influence public opinion support for the European Union (EU)? In international relations theory, the idea that citizens' support for the EU depends on material benefits deriving from integration, i.e. whether European integration makes individuals economically better off (utilitarian support), has been common since the 1970s, but has never been the subject of a formal treatment (Hix 2005). A small number of studies in the 1990s have investigated econometrically the link between national economic performance and mass support for European integration (Eichenberg and Dalton 1993; Anderson and Kalthenthaler 1996), but only making informal assumptions. The main aim of Chapter 2 is thus to propose and test our model with a view to providing a more complete and theoretically grounded picture of public support for the EU. Following theories of utilitarian support, we assume that citizens are in favour of membership if they receive economic benefits from it. To develop this idea, we propose a simple political economic model drawing on the recent economic literature on integration and disintegration processes. The basic element is the existence of a trade-off between the benefits of centralisation and the costs of harmonising policies in presence of heterogeneous preferences among countries. The approach we follow is that of the recent literature on the political economy of international unions and the unification or break-up of nations (Bolton and Roland 1997, Alesina and Wacziarg 1999, Alesina et al. 2001, 2005a, to mention only the relevant). The general perspective is that unification provides returns to scale in the provision of public goods, but reduces each member state’s ability to determine its most favoured bundle of public goods. In the simple model presented in Chapter 2, support for membership of the union is increasing in the union’s average income and in the loss of efficiency stemming from being outside the union, and decreasing in a country’s average income, while increasing heterogeneity of preferences among countries points to a reduced scope of the union. Afterwards we empirically test the model with data on the EU; more precisely, we perform an econometric analysis employing a panel of member countries over time. The second part of Chapter 2 thus tries to answer the following question: does public opinion support for the EU really depend on economic factors? The findings are broadly consistent with our theoretical expectations: the conditions of the national economy, differences in income among member states and heterogeneity of preferences shape citizens’ attitude towards their country’s membership of the EU. Consequently, this analysis offers some interesting policy implications for the present debate about ratification of the European Constitution and, more generally, about how the EU could act in order to gain more support from the European public. Citizens in many member states are called to express their opinion in national referenda, which may well end up in rejection of the Constitution, as recently happened in France and the Netherlands, triggering a European-wide political crisis. These events show that nowadays understanding public attitude towards the EU is not only of academic interest, but has a strong relevance for policy-making too. Chapter 3 empirically investigates the link between European integration and regional autonomy in Italy. Over the last few decades, the double tendency towards supranationalism and regional autonomy, which has characterised some European States, has taken a very interesting form in this country, because Italy, besides being one of the founding members of the EU, also implemented a process of decentralisation during the 1970s, further strengthened by a constitutional reform in 2001. Moreover, the issue of the allocation of competences among the EU, the Member States and the regions is now especially topical. The process leading to the drafting of European Constitution (even if then it has not come into force) has attracted much attention from a constitutional political economy perspective both on a normative and positive point of view (Breuss and Eller 2004, Mueller 2005). The Italian parliament has recently passed a new thorough constitutional reform, still to be approved by citizens in a referendum, which includes, among other things, the so called “devolution”, i.e. granting the regions exclusive competence in public health care, education and local police. Following and extending the methodology proposed in a recent influential article by Alesina et al. (2005b), which only concentrated on the EU activity (treaties, legislation, and European Court of Justice’s rulings), we develop a set of quantitative indicators measuring the intensity of the legislative activity of the Italian State, the EU and the Italian regions from 1973 to 2005 in a large number of policy categories. By doing so, we seek to answer the following broad questions. Are European and regional legislations substitutes for state laws? To what extent are the competences attributed by the European treaties or the Italian Constitution actually exerted in the various policy areas? Is their exertion consistent with the normative recommendations from the economic literature about their optimum allocation among different levels of government? The main results show that, first, there seems to be a certain substitutability between EU and national legislations (even if not a very strong one), but not between regional and national ones. Second, the EU concentrates its legislative activity mainly in international trade and agriculture, whilst social policy is where the regions and the State (which is also the main actor in foreign policy) are more active. Third, at least two levels of government (in some cases all of them) are significantly involved in the legislative activity in many sectors, even where the rationale for that is, at best, very questionable, indicating that they actually share a larger number of policy tasks than that suggested by the economic theory. It appears therefore that an excessive number of competences are actually shared among different levels of government. From an economic perspective, it may well be recommended that some competences be shared, but only when the balance between scale or spillover effects and heterogeneity of preferences suggests so. When, on the contrary, too many levels of government are involved in a certain policy area, the distinction between their different responsibilities easily becomes unnecessarily blurred. This may not only leads to a slower and inefficient policy-making process, but also risks to make it too complicate to understand for citizens, who, on the contrary, should be able to know who is really responsible for a certain policy when they vote in national,local or European elections or in referenda on national or European constitutional issues.

The Making of a Shiite Bourgeoisie in Lebanon Political Mobilisation, Economic Resources and Formation of a Social Group

The thesis analyses the making of the Shiite middle- and upper/entrepreneurial-class in Lebanon from the 1960s till the present day. The trajectory explores the historical, political and social (internal and external) factors that brought a sub-proletariat to mobilise and become an entrepreneurial bourgeoisie in the span of less than three generations. This work proposes the main theoretical hypothesis to unpack and reveal the trajectory of a very recent social class that through education, diaspora, political and social mobilisation evolved in a few years into a very peculiar bourgeoisie: whereas Christian-Maronite middle class practically produced political formations and benefited from them and from Maronite’s state supremacy (National Pact, 1943) reinforcing the community’s status quo, Shiites built their own bourgeoisie from within, and mobilised their “cadres” (Boltanski) not just to benefit from their renovated presence at the state level, but to oppose to it. The general Social Movement Theory (SMT), as well as a vast amount of the literature on (middle) class formation are therefore largely contradicted, opening up new territories for discussion on how to build a bourgeoisie without the state’s support (Social Mobilisation Theory, Resource Mobilisation Theory) and if, eventually, the middle class always produces democratic movements (the emergence of a social group out of backwardness and isolation into near dominance of a political order). The middle/upper class described here is at once an economic class related to the control of multiple forms of capital, and produced by local, national, and transnational networks related to flows of services, money, and education, and a culturally constructed social location and identity structured by economic as well as other forms of capital in relation to other groups in Lebanon.