A redefinição democrática através da praxis intencional: a conscientização dos valores éticos

Procurando-se reafirmar a importância da teoria marxista, este artigo propõe-se a redefinição da democracia enquanto método e a possibilidade de sua superação para democracia-condição social através da praxis intencional exercida no cotidiano. A compreensão da vida cotidiana requer a sua reconstituição ontológica pela via da conscientização dos valores éticos contidos na genericidade.

Ontology and gnoseology of capitalism in Isaak Illich Rubin: 'Essays on marxist theory of value'

This concise essay attempts to show why Isaak Illich Rubin is, until today, the best interpreter, commentator and developer of The Capital of Karl Marx, understanding Marx’s work as an ontology and a gnoseology of the capitalist economic system. To do this, we analyze the relations existing between Marx, Rubin and the theory of science of the Spanish Marxist philosopher Gustavo Bueno. In this way, we can interpret the work “Essays on Marxist theory of value” also as an ontology and a gnoseology of capitalism.

Political theory and theoretical physics

This paper explains, somewhat along a Simmelian line, that political theory may produce practical and universal theories like those developed in theoretical physics. The reasoning behind this paper is to show that the Element of Democracy Theory may be true by way of comparing it to Einstein’s Special Relativity – specifically concerning the parameters of symmetry, unification, simplicity, and utility. These parameters are what make a theory in physics as meeting them not only fits with current knowledge, but also produces paths towards testing (application). As the Element of Democracy Theory meets these same parameters, it could settle the debate concerning the definition of democracy. This will be shown firstly by discussing why no one has yet achieved a universal definition of democracy; secondly by explaining the parameters chosen (as in why these and not others confirm or scuttle theories); and thirdly by comparing how Special Relativity and the Element of Democracy match the parameters.

Political theory and theoretical physics [Revised]

This paper explains, somewhat along a Simmelian line, that political theory may produce practical and universal theories like those developed in theoretical physics. The reasoning behind this paper is to show that the Element of Democracy Theory may be true by way of comparing it to Einstein’s Special Relativity – specifically concerning the parameters of symmetry, unification, simplicity, and utility. These parameters are what make a theory in physics as meeting them not only fits with current knowledge, but also produces paths towards testing (application). As the Element of Democracy Theory meets these same parameters, it could settle the debate concerning the definition of democracy. This will be shown firstly by discussing why no one has yet achieved a universal definition of democracy; secondly by explaining the parameters chosen (as in why these and not others confirm or scuttle theories); and thirdly by comparing how Special Relativity and the Element of Democracy match the parameters.

Political theory and theoretical physics

This paper argues, somewhat along a Simmelian line, that political theory may produce practical and universal theories like those developed in theoretical physics. The reasoning behind this paper is to show that the theory of ‘basic democracy’ may be true by way of comparing it to Einstein’s Special Relativity – specifically concerning the parameters of symmetry, unification, simplicity, and utility. These parameters are what make a theory in physics as meeting them not only fits with current knowledge, but also produces paths towards testing (application). As the theory of ‘basic democracy’ may meet these same parameters, it could settle the debate concerning the definition of democracy. This will be argued firstly by discussing what the theory of ‘basic democracy’ is and why it differs from previous work; secondly by explaining the parameters chosen (as in why these and not others confirm or scuttle theories); and thirdly by comparing how Special Relativity and the theory of ‘basic democracy’ may match the parameters.

An interview with Professor David Held : exploring the concepts of cosmopolitanism and democracy

David Held is the Graham Wallace Chair in Political Science, and co-director of LSE Global Governance, at the London School of Economics. He is the author of many works, such as Cosmopolitanism: Ideals and Realities (2010); The Cosmopolitanism Reader (2010), with Garrett Brown; Globalisation/AntiGlobalisation (2007), Models of Democracy (2006), Global Covenant (2004) and Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture (1999). Professor Held is also the co-founder, alongside Lord Professor Anthony Giddens, of Polity Press. Professor Held is widely known for his work concerning cosmopolitan theory, democracy, and social, political and economic global improvement. His Global Policy Journal endeavours to marry academic developments with practitioner realities, and contributes to the understanding and improvement of our governing systems.

Parrhesia and democracy : Truthtelling, WikiLeaks and the Arab Spring

Parrhesia — the practice of truth-telling — was adapted to various ancient legal, political, philosophical and religious contexts. In this essay we focus on parrhesia in politics and its relevance for democracy, concentrating on the account given by Michel Foucault. We suggest that Foucault’s approach to parrhesia and democracy is valuable because of its stress on the analysis of governmental rationalities and the ethical comportment of citizens, rather than on the normative dimensions of democracy, as is more usual (but more sterile) in political thought. We take two modern examples of truth-telling’s role in democracy – the recent WikiLeaks scandal and the political struggles in Tunisia and Egypt – as a way of assessing the value of Foucault’s distinctive approach and the relevance of parrhesia for democracy today.

The legitimation of risk and democracy: A case study of Bt cotton in Andhra Pradesh, India

This thesis explores the inter-related attempts to secure the legitimation of risk and democracy with regard to Bt cotton, a genetically modified crop, in the state of Andhra Pradesh in India. The research included nine months of ethnographic fieldwork, extensive library and newspaper research, as well as university attendance in India, undertaken between June, 2010 and March, 2011. This comparative study (involving organic, NPM and Bt cotton cultivation) was conducted in three villages in Telangana, a region which was granted secession from Andhra Pradesh in July, 2013, and in Hyderabad, the state capital. Andhra Pradesh is renowned for its agrarian crisis and farmer suicides, as well as for the conflict which Bt cotton represents. This study adopts the categories of legitimation developed by Van Leeuwen (2007; 2008) in order to explore the theory of risk society (Beck, 1992; 1994; 1999; 2009), and the Habermasian (1996: 356-366) core-periphery model as means of theoretically analysing democratic legitimacy. The legitimation of risk and democracy in relation to Bt cotton refers to normative views on the way in which power should be exercised with regard to risk differentiation, construction and definition. The analysis finds that the more legitimate the exercise of power, the lower the exposure to risk as a concern for the collective. This also has consequences for the way in which resources are distributed, knowledge constructed, and democratic praxis institutionalised as a concern for social and epistemic justice. The thesis argues that the struggle to legitimate risk and democracy has implications not only for the constitution of the new state of Telangana and the region’s development, but also for the emergence of global society and the future development of humanity as a whole.

Revisiting Iris Marion Young on Normalisation, Inclusion and Democracy

Vieten's edited collection brings together papers that were given at the I M Young Memorial Symposium 'Inclusion and Democracy Revisited', held in Amsterdam in 2012. The different chapters presented explore in-depth, Young's models of a 'politics of cultural difference', and a 'politics of positional difference' read in combination with her critique of normalisation. Young regards the latter as decisive to any change for the better when reaching out politically to a fairer and more just democratic society.
With the current political, economic and socio-cultural crisis in mind, the contemporary world of global speed and transformed societies in and beyond Europe needs a refinement of what we understand 'normalisation' and 'difference' to be. How can we connect to each other, and in what ways can Young's 'structural inequality model' be applied to develop alternative outlooks on how to enhance inclusion and democracy in different nation states?

After the Critique of Rights: For a Radical Democratic Theory and Practice of Human Rights

The critique of human rights has proliferated in critical legal thinking over recent years, making it clear that we can no longer uncritically approach human rights in their liberal form. In this article I assert that after the critique of rights one way human rights may be productively re-engaged in radical politics is by drawing from the radical democratic tradition. Radical democratic thought provides plausible resources to rework the shortcomings of liberal human rights, and allows human rights to be brought within the purview of a wider political project adopting a critical approach to current relations of power. Building upon previous re-engagements with rights using radical democratic thought, I return to the work of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe to explore how human rights may be thought as an antagonistic hegemonic activity within a critical relation to power, a concept which is fundamentally futural, and may emerge as one site for work towards radical and plural democracy. I also assert, via Judith Butler's model of cultural translation, that a radical democratic practice of human rights may be advanced which resonates with and builds upon already existing activism, thereby holding possibilities to persuade those who remain sceptical as to radical re-engagements with rights.

Things Fall Apart: Dictatorships, Development, and Democracy in Africa

Recent events in Africa provide evidence of the failure of dictatorships to meet the needs of citizens and serve to debunk a number of development theory assumptions: that democratization is culturally determined, that democratization will follow economic development, and that dictatorships tend to produce durable, stable development. Therefore, the attempt to achieve development without democratization is risky and potentially very costly. We argue that dictatorship in Africa serves a function akin to Myrdal's backwash effects, thwarting economic progress in a cumulative and circular way, and that democratization must become a necessary criterion of engagement with African countries.

Human creation, imagination and autonomy: a brief introduction to Castoriadis’ social and psychoanalytical philosophy

During the last decade Castoriadis’ questioning has become a reference point in contemporary social theory. In this article I examine some of the key notions in Castoriadis’ work and explore how he strives to develop a theory on the irreducible creativity in the radical imagination of the individual and in the institution of the social-historical sphere. Firstly, I briefly discuss his conception of modern capitalism as bureaucratic capitalism, a view initiated by his criticism of the USSR regime. The following break up with Marxist theory and his psychoanalytic interests empowered him to criticize Lacan and read Freud in an imaginative, though unorthodox, fashion. I argue that this critical enterprise assisted greatly Castoriadis in his conception of the radical imaginary and in his unveiling of the political aspects of psychoanalysis. On the issue of the radical imaginary and its methodological repercussions, I’m focusing mainly on the radical imagination of the subject and its importance in the transition from the ‘‘psychic’’ to the ‘‘subject’’. Taking up the notion of “Being” as a starting point, I examine the notion of autonomy, seeking its roots in the ancient Greek world. By looking at notions such as “praxis”, “doing”, “project” and “elucidation”, I show how Castoriadis sought to redefine revolution as a means for social and individual autonomy. Finally I attempt to clarify the meaning of “democracy” and “democratic society” in the context of the social imaginary and its creations, the social imaginary significations.

Közjó és demokrácia. Két közgazdaságtani elmélet a demokráciáról (Common good and democracy. Two economic theories of democracy)

A tanulmány a demokrácia két közgazdaságtani elméletét mutatja be. A demokrácia klasszikus elmélete a közjó fogalmára épült: a klasszikus politikai filozófia érvelése szerint a demokrácia intézménye a közjó megvalósulásának eszköze. Schumpeter bírálta a klasszikus elméletet: a közgazdasági szemléletet alkalmazva a közjó értelmezésére leválasztotta a demokráciáról a közjó fogalmát. Schumpeter szerint a demokrácia szubsztantív felfogása nem tartható, ezért ehelyett a demokrácia procedurális értelmezését kínálta fel. Az alkotmányos közgazdaságtan nem fogadja el sem a közjó és demokrácia fogalmainak elválasztását, sem a közjó szubsztantív értelmezését, ehelyett a közjónak és a demokráciának egyaránt procedurális értelmezését javasolja. _____ This essay deals with two economic theories of democracy. The classical doctrine of democracy was built on the concept of the common good, classical political philosophy arguing that the institution of democracy was the instrument for realizing the common good. This theory was criticized by Schumpeter, who applied the method of modern economics to analysis of the concept, which he separated from democracy, arguing that the substantive concept of democracy was untenable, and proposing to replace it with the procedural concept of democracy. Constitutional economics does not accept such separation of the concepts of democracy and the common good, but it does not accept the substantive interpretation of the common good either. Rather, it proposes a procedural concept of both the common good and of democracy.