Anti-democratic Research Articles

ЭМИГРАЦИЯ VS СОВЕТСКАЯ ЛИТЕРАТУРА: ДИАЛОГ В КОНТЕКСТЕ ИНТЕЛЛЕКТУАЛЬНОЙ ИСТОРИИ РОССИИ

В статье рассматриваются основные тенденции оценки советской культуры и литературы критикой русского зарубежья 19201930х гг. В основу предложенного историкокультурного подхода положен принцип диалогичности, который базировался на основных доминантах национальной модели культуры: литературоцентризме, дуальных моделях ментальности, представлении о единстве и целостности русской культуры, опоре на традицию русской интеллектуальной истории XIX в. The paper examines the main trends in the evaluation of Soviet culture and literature by the Russian migr critics of 19201930s. The author applies a historical and cultural approach based on the principle of dialogism, which in its turn rests on the main Russian culture dominants: literature centrism, dual model of mentality, unity and integrity of Russian culture, and Russian intellectual tradition of the 19th century. The migrs re ection on Soviet literature is analyzed in terms of identity search and deep genetic essence of Russian culture and its system of values. The dialogue was mainly evolving in the sphere of literary criticism and journalism. We traced the connection between migr and Russian democratic criticism of the 19th century (Herzen, SaltykovShchedrin, etc.), which is particularly re ected in the dispute in the journals of the 19th and early 20th centuries. The excerpts from various critical articles and reviews of this period demonstrate the common approach of their authors to the analysis of literary phenomena. Having studied the articles from migr and Soviet newspapers and journals (A. Bem, G. Adamovich, R. Gul, F. Stepun, J. Sazonova, etc.) the author comes to a conclusion that the Russian literature and the Russian criticism on both sides of the border though opposing and polemical, in fact show historical integrity and mutual attraction. One of the factors determining these reciprocally exclusive trends in the criticism of Soviet literature is the development of relativism, which overall characterizes Western European mindset. The analysis of the publications in the journals Sovremennye Zapisky (The Modern Notes), Russkie Zapisky (The Russian Notes), and Tchisla (The Numbers) demonstrates that traditional emigration model ones own alien was gradually transforming into ones own another. There is a tendency to understand, and sometimes justify the Soviet art. Special attention is paid to the articles with serious analysis of Soviet literature, its topics, poetics, and genres. The traditional standpoint of the migrs has evolved from ideological labeling to serious and thoughtful analysis, thus developing scienti c criteria in further deep analysis of Russian and Soviet literature by G. Nivat, M. Aucouturier, J.С. Lanne, N. Struve, V. Losskaya, C. Clarke, J. Soumela, S. Gartsiano, etc.

Euripides and the Origins of Democratic «Anarchia»

In this essay, I argue that the terms anarchia and anarchos had become associated with critiques of democracy before the final quarter of the fifth century BCE. I begin with a review of archaic and early classical uses of the term, with a particular focus on two instances in Aeschylus’ Oresteia. I then examine Euripides’ two uses of anarchia/anarchos, one in Hecuba and the other in Iphigenia at Aulis. In each case, we see that the concept of anarchic behavior is associated with democratic bodies; that charges of anarchia are laid by characters who engage with critiques of democracy throughout the dramas; and that the term itself is embedded within discourses that are laden with the language and rhetoric of anti-democratic discourses found in Thucydides, Herodotus, and the Old Oligarch. Given that Euripidean references to anarchia are embedded within terminology that was already current in contemporary anti-democratic thought, I conclude that the concept of democracy’s ‘anarchic’ tendencies had already been developed by the final quarter of the fifth century BCE.

Perceptions of democracy and the rise of Donald Trump: A framing analysis of Saudi Arabian media

The 2016 US presidential election, which brought Donald J. Trump to power, raised concerns that his ascendency could undermine US democracy promotion and enable illiberal regimes to resist calls for reform. This article seeks to hold this argument up to empirical scrutiny via a framing analysis of coverage of the US election in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). To some extent, the analysis supports the claim: throughout the election, the KSA media offered several substantive criticisms of democracy. However, Trump’s campaign also served as a catalyst for a discussion about the merits of democracy, revealing some admiration for its key principles, and an acknowledgement of the challenges it faces in the 21st century.

La contradicción entre capitalismo y democracia: hacia una nueva perspectiva emancipatoria

Vários autores ao longo das últimas décadas consolidaram uma forte "crítica democrática" do marxismo. Neste artigo vamos nos concentrar nos trabalhos de Ernesto Laclau e Chantal Mouffe, de um lado, e Axel Honneth, de outro, que questionam o marxismo a partir de perspectivas que buscam reconstruir a reorganização das relações sociais que emergem com a modernidade, a "revolução democrática" e o direito moderno. Nosso objetivo é mostrar que a teoria da derivação estatal de Antoine Artous permite reformular, em termos marxistas, a contradição entre capitalismo e democracia. Isso, ao mesmo tempo, reconstruiria os processos de extensão dos direitos na modernidade e abriria um projeto anticapitalista não totalizante, diferente do que chamaremos de "concepção orgânica" da emancipação. Como nosso trabalho é principalmente teórico, nossa metodologia será a interpretação de textos e o confronto de hipóteses de leitura.

When STEM and STEAM Really mean ABC: A Democratic Critique of “Anything but Civics” Schools

In this article, we discuss the rise of what we call ABC schools: Anything but Civics. These are STEM/STEAM schools and programs that orient their focus around teaching science, technology, engineering, and math subjects (sometimes adding the arts). We trouble the tendency toward individualistic and narrowly economic orientations in these programs and discuss strategies for reinfusing a democratic mission and vision into education (both within and beyond STEM/STEAM schools). In making our argument, we discuss competing purposes for education, argue for why today’s context calls for democratic visions of education to take precedence, discuss the growth of STEM education along with problematic myths about STEM, identify the hidden curriculum of STEM (to support individualistic/corporate/capitalist visions for the purposes of schooling) and suggest both practical and idealistic paths forward.

Democratic rights protection: the case for weak judicial review implicit in the democratic critique of judicial review – RETRACTED

Democratic critique of judicial review – A case for judicial review based on democracy – The unsuccessful case against weak judicial review based on democracy – The distinctive democratic qualities of courts – Contestability of political decisions – The argument for weak judicial review implicit in the democratic critique

Democratic rights protection: the case for weak judicial review implicit in the democratic critique of judicial review – RETRACTED

Democratic rights protection: the case for weak judicial review implicit in the democratic critique of judicial review – RETRACTED

A Wolf in the City: Tyranny and the Tyrant in Plato's Republic by Cinzia Arruzza

Reviewed by: A Wolf in the City: Tyranny and the Tyrant in Plato's Republic by Cinzia Arruzza Mark A. Johnstone Cinzia Arruzza. A Wolf in the City: Tyranny and the Tyrant in Plato's Republic. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019. Pp. xi + 296. Cloth, $74.00. In this excellent book, Cinzia Arruzza offers the first book-length study of Plato's prominent treatment, in the Republic, of tyranny and the tyrannical character type. The book is divided into two parts of roughly equal length, entitled "Tyranny and Democracy" and "The Tyrant's Soul," each subdivided into three chapters. Part I focuses on Plato's political thought, and Part II on his moral psychology. Although the two parts could be read independently, Arruzza insists, rightly, that they inform and enhance each other, and are best read together. This reflects her conviction that the psychological and political strands in the Republic are inextricably intertwined. Arruzza's main claims in Part I are that Plato's detailed depictions of tyranny and the tyrant in Republic 9 (i) represent an amalgam of well-established literary tropes, not a critique of some specific historical individual or regime, and (ii) are best understood as part of his attack on democracy. Both claims are grounded in the idea, defended in chapter 1, that common depictions of tyranny in (primarily fifth-century) Greek literature played an important role in shaping democratic self-understanding. Specifically, Arruzza argues, negative literary depictions of tyranny served as a kind of "inverted mirror" in which democrats might "contemplate the key features of democratic practice by way of opposition" (9). Plato's key move in the Republic, Arruzza maintains, was to unsettle democrats' use of tyranny as an inverted mirror by identifying as the opposite of tyranny, not democracy, but rather a society ruled by philosophers. Indeed, Plato goes further: democracy is not only not the opposite of tyranny, but also tyranny's natural progenitor—both because a regime ruled by popular opinion will be susceptible to capture by a demagogue, and also because democracy's valorization of freedom (understood merely as lack of constraint) and characteristic hedonism naturally lead people to aspire to the tyrant's life. Arruzza's claims here are original, well defended, and plausible. Her interpretation also explains some features of the Republic that have puzzled or frustrated interpreters: Plato's stereotypical and exaggerated depiction of the tyrant; his portrait's failure to align with any particular historical figure; his low ranking of democracy among corrupt regimes; and his claim that tyranny naturally "grows" out of democracy. The book's first part also nicely illustrates two general features of Arruzza's approach to Plato. The first is her focus [End Page 750] on Plato's appropriations of literary tropes for his own distinctive purposes (the image of the tyrant as a wolf is a prominent example running through the book). The second is her opposition to any tendency to "prune" Plato—that is, to try to "save him from himself" by marginalizing strains of his thought that go against the grain of modern sensibilities, including his critique of democracy (4–5). The second part of the book explores the psychology of Plato's tyrant. Its three chapters correspond to the three parts of the Republic's tripartite soul: "appetite," "spirit," and "reason." Arruzza takes as her working hypothesis a moderate form of "realism" about parts of the soul: they are real entities, not mere labels for kinds of desire, but do not each have their own reasoning powers. Her main claims are: (i) Plato depicts the tyrannical man as governed by appetite and eros (which is sexual, but not itself an appetite); (ii) spirit, best understood as a "drive to self-assertion" (193), plays an important and underrecognized role in the tyrant's psyche (Plato's imagery of the tyrant as a wolf reflects the hardened and corrupt state of his soul's spirited part); and (iii) the tyrant has strong intellectual capacities (his enslaved rational part remains active; indeed, he is a person of great talent: a "philosophical nature gone astray" [247]). Arruzza's discussion of the tyrant's moral psychology is sophisticated, rich, and nuanced. Especially...

Sobre la democracia antigua como problema filosófico en Foucault, Castoriadis y Rancière

En este artículo me preguntaré por las razones que hicieron a Foucault, Castoriadis y Rancière ocuparse por la democracia antigua, básicamente a principios de los años 80 del siglo XX. Para dilucidar tales razones los vincularé con una tradición del helenismo francés–la Escuela de París–, con una trayectoria biográfica específica a cada uno de ellos y con los desafíos que representa la crisis del marxismo. Terminaré explicando por qué podemos aprender de nuestros tres autores gracias a un estudio del contexto en el que produjeron sus ideas.

Populism, religion, and distorted communication

This paper addresses right-wing populist mobilization against Islam and Muslims. Taking up the example of the 2017 electoral campaigns of the Alternative fur Deutschland in Germany, it highlights that some right-wing parties phrase their rejection of Islam in a decidedly liberal and democratic language: They demand certain constraints for Muslim organizations and Muslim citizens; but rather than phrasing this as an illiberal infringement of Muslims’ rights, they justify these constraints as necessary for the defense of liberal democracy against an anti-liberal, anti-egalitarian, and anti-democratic Islam. This begs the question how to distinguish a legitimate critical discourse on religion that should be welcomed in a democratic public sphere from discriminatory discourse veiled in a democratic language. The paper takes up four theoretical approaches to tackle this problem: the concept of right-wing populism as an ideology centered around a nativist notion of the people, Habermas’s normative political theory of religion in the public sphere, the concept of Islamophobia as prejudice, and the theory of anti-Muslim racism as hegemonic discourse. Each of these approaches contributes to the task of making a distinction between democratic criticism and veiled discriminatory discourse, but each of them has their shortcomings. Therefore, the paper suggests combining their strengths by unifying them under the Habermasian concept of systematically distorted communication. The paper ends with the hypothesis that present-day discursive negotiations around Islam in Germany take place under systematically distorted conditions of communication, producing discrimination and marginalization and that the populist mobilization of the Alternative for Germany builds on an exacerbates this distortion.

Sovereignty and democracy, with a look at David Runciman’s How Democracy Ends

Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan mocks ancient democracy, which presented itself as a polity of free citizens: ‘[…] the Athenians were taught, (to keep them from desire of changing their Government,) tha...

Problem demokracji totalitarnej w filozofii politycznej libertarianizmu

The aim of the paper involves presentation and evaluation of the concept of totalitarian democracy, which is to be found in the works of the libertarian political philosophy proponents: Murray N. Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe. In the course of our analysis, the author formulates following tenets. Firstly, although libertarian thinkers do not employ the expression „totalitarian democracy” themselves, that notion can be successfully identified in their writings. To Rothbard and Hoppe democracy — including the liberal one — is a totalitarian system by nature. It is supposed to stem from democratic regime’s lust for taking control over all aspects of individual’s life in libertarian terms: all aspects of the use of private property, as well as from the inherent fallacies of liberal safeguards, designed in order to protect democracy from degradation to mere tyranny of majority, such as the rule of law, constitutionalism, and checks and balances principles. Secondly, in author’s judgement, however Rothbard’s and — in particular — Hoppe’s critique of democracy should be considered consistent with libertarian ideals, it appears to a certain extent exaggerated also in their light.

The Inherently Undemocratic EU Democracy: Moving Beyond the Democratic Deficitt Debate

This chapter argues that the debate on the democratic ‘deficit’ or ‘default’ of the EU, both generally and specifically with reference to the Euro-crisis, is misplaced. What is usually perceived as a crisis of EU democracy is a manifestation of a more systemic displacement of democracy, as an inherent feature of the European project. This assumption is explored by examining the ideological and normative influences that informed the EU’s construction, as well as the forces that have continued to provide a vehicle for those influences to take political and legal form. These suggest that the undemocratic nature of the EU is necessary for the survival and perpetuation of the Union’s specific vision of a common (free) market, and thus of contemporary European capitalism, as well as for the affirmation and continuity of the EU bureaucracy and a symbiotic world of socio-economic interests. Consequently, the ‘democratic deficit’ of the EU cannot be palliated through institutional reform. Moreover, the EU will likely increasingly engage in a process of building European identity based on a singular vision, resulting in the gradual exclusion of those who do not share a commitment to the EU’s market telos and the marginalisation of substantive democratic critique.

Porównanie anarchistycznej etyki argumentacji Hoppego z demokratyczną isegorią grecką

The paper confronts the argumentation ethics developed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, a libertarian and anarcho-capitalist thinker, with basic assumptions of the ancient democracy (originally called isegoria , that is, “an equal right to speak”), both of which are rooted in the phenomenon of discourse. Based on an analytical comparison the paper argues that possible similarities are superficial and deceptive. Indeed, despite some similarities prima facie , the theories in question have different nature and aims. The ethics of argumentation is a philosophical theory and as such has a different ambition than isegoria , which was a political system, even if it had some sound philosophical justification. The paper distinguishes three critical categories of analysis: argumentation, mutual recognition, and deliberation, none of which is found to possess a close meaning or function in both theories under investigation.

如何尋找傳統的現代性

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.
 在今天，古典文學、文化傳統及相應的知識譜系和當代文學之間有一種很難彌合的斷層。它們所造成的直接後果是，在思維方式上，當代作家更多接受西方文學的精神，譬如孤獨、懷疑、單獨的個人（這些當然很好，但卻缺乏一種根本性的背景），語言上缺失了中國古典話語的現代白話，很難有幽深、雜糅的語言。這也使得我們對世界的想象是單面的。偉大的作家既繼承傳統，又創造傳統。他能使很多詞語、知識重新焕發生機，他能夠啓動、洗刷塵土，並且賦予它現代意義。美籍阿拉伯學者薩義德在《人本主義與民主批評》中提倡“重回語文學”。重回語文學，就是重回人文主義，通過對語言的溯源重新回到歷史生成之初，去尋找言詞背後的“歷史生成”，也即尋找傳統，在批判中繼承。我以爲，對於寫作者和文學批評者而言，重回語文學，首先意味著重新把目光投向語言、詞語本身，從對語言的持續關注和追索中發現文學内部所透露出的幽深的時間和空間，從而尋找“傳統”的現代含義。
 Nowadays, contemporary literature has been distanced from classical literature, cultural traditions, and relevant knowledge, giving rise to a rupture that has become difficult to mend. This rupture has direct consequences. In their way of thinking, contemporary writers are more receptive to the spirit of Western literature, resulting in the roles of lone, skeptical, and helpless individuals (which, of course, are fine, but lack a fundamental background). There is a feebleness in the modern vernacular language within the classical Chinese discourse; therefore one can rarely see a profound, mixed language. This leads us to have a single-sided view of the world. A great writer should be able to not only inherit traditions but also create traditions. S/he should be able to rejuvenate terminology and knowledge, raise dust and then wash it out, and endow it with modern significance. The American-Arab scholar Edward Said calls for “the return to philology” in his Humanism and Democratic Criticism. This advocacy in fact refers to a return to humanism. The process is to return to the beginning of history by tracing the origin of language in order to look for the “formation of history” behind certain diction. This is the same as tracing tradition by critically inheriting it. For writers and literary critics, I believe, the first significant task is to refocus on language and diction per se. Through the constant attention to and pursuit of language, they shall discover the profound dimensions of time and space within literature so as to find the modern meaning of “tradition.”

Co Tocqueville mówi nam o demokracji – spojrzenie z perspektywy ekonomicznej teorii polityki

lexis de Tocqueville has been known chiefly as a liberal thinker and political theorist, but his economic concepts – albeit not systematized – are equally important. Using the framework of public choice theory, this article aims to reconstruct his widely known critique of democracy in the economic terms. Studying the growth of democratic governrment by notions of self-interest, rational ignorance, rational irrationality and other concepts borrowed from economics could allow one to acknowledge the importance of Tocqueville as a precursor of public choice theory and the need to remain doubtful in the face of democratic rule.

Cruising Baghdad

AbstractThis article uses a queer lens to examine two short stories by the Iraqi communist, teacher, and prose writer Dhu al-Nun Ayyub (1908–88), “The Eagles’ Anthem” and “How I Found a Guy,” published in his collection Sadiqi (1938). Scholars have avoided analysis of the homoerotic and heterotopic aspects of Ayyub’s writings, even if they mention his depictions of physical attraction between men. Rather than read these fictional texts as sociological studies of sexual sensibilities, the article assumes that they tapped into and reflected psychological and social dynamics in interwar Baghdad. The Ayyub stories, which render homoerotic masculine sexualities as commonplace and a positive aspect of city spaces, are thus distinguished from most Iraqi writings during this period. The stories stage homoeroticism and love between men as democratic critique and affirmation of heterogeneity and vitality in a nationalist, militarist, and heteronormalizing setting that increasingly associated homosexuality with moral dissolution and backwardness.

Comic Democracies: From Ancient Athens to the American Republic by Angus Fletcher

Reviewed by: Comic Democracies: From Ancient Athens to the American Republic by Angus Fletcher Robert Danisch Fletcher, Angus. Comic Democracies: From Ancient Athens to the American Republic. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2016. Pp. 224. Modern democracy is a complex and contested idea. We can view it as a system of government that loosely describes most of the institutions of politics in the West, or we can view it as a way of life defined by the pursuit of freedom and equality. Both views may, in our moment, be under assault by various forms of demagoguery. We, in the West, seem to agree that whatever our view of democracy happens to be, its origins are in ancient Athens, and that the idea itself may need some revitalization in order to continue to meet the demands of our ever-changing sociopolitical landscape. Angus Fletcher's Comic Democracies is both a look back at the historical origins of thinking about democracy and a set of suggestions for how we might best cultivate and improve our current democratic practices. This book begins with the contention that the origin of democracy is tied to the origin of comedy and that these ties require us to ask why the two developed together and what contemporary uses might be made of the connection between the two. To begin to develop a narrative that will answer those two questions, Fletcher makes a careful distinction between ancient and modern democracy that informs the argument of the book. He claims that modern democracy is "more principled" in its attempts to actively promote human rights and freedoms, while ancient democracy is "more pragmatic" in its attempts to alleviate hunger, poverty, and misery (3). In order, therefore, to promote modern democracy, we can borrow some of the ancient pragmatic techniques embodied in comedy to address some of the issues of our current predicament. [End Page 328] To develop the distinction between ancient and modern democracy, Fletcher describes a "liberal-electoral model" that originates in Enlightenment philosophy yet seems incapable of effectively responding to the current setbacks that have plagued so-called "free-market liberal democracy" (4). In response to the limitations of this liberal model, Fletcher argues that old comedies can "actively support" the growth of democracy through examples of the ways in which "pluralist, problem-based, and empirical approaches" (8) to decision making and public life have succeeded. Ancient democracy was empirical in that it was inductive and used a "feedback-driven logic," pragmatic in that it was driven by the search for practical responses to material problems, and pluralist in that it actively changed course and engaged multiple alternatives whenever situations demanded. The characteristics of pluralism, pragmatism, and empiricism were the underlying values of comedy as well. Fletcher covers a catalogue of authors that contain an "eclectic variety of comic practices for encouraging flexible, cooperative, and inclusive societies. These practices thus provided an effective (if unintentional) resource for cultivating demokratia" (13) and a "crudely empirical way of measuring" (13) the success of comedy to promote democracy. The first chapter offers a thoughtful reading of Aristophanes and the support that his trilogy offered to "the less perfect and more pragmatic dynamics of Athenian populism" (26). One of the ways in which Frogs, for example, helped the development of ancient democracy was by acknowledging and demonstrating the ways in which the citizens of Athens and the gods themselves were "ludicrous" and thus these plays showed us that we ought to "recognize that every authority has its limits" (26). Fletcher goes on to claim that "[t]he best that could be said about any political course was that […] it answered the crises of the times, making it wise to hold onto alternatives that might prove their worth tomorrow" (28). The plays also equate Athenian civic problems with hunger, indigestion, and sexual pain, which meant that Aristophanes focused the attention of his audience on material concerns. The whole movement of the plays, therefore, was to turn people's attention to the practical logic of worldly problem solving. From the perspective of this trilogy, democracy is not the search for the universal ideal of freedom, but is instead the "discovery that diversity is...

Philology Matters! Essays on the Art of Reading Slowly, ed. Harry Lönnroth. Medieval and Renaisscance Authors and Texts, 89. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2017, xxxv, 223 pp., 15 color ill., 5 tables.

The chosen title for this book, a collection of articles by Scandinavian medievalists, could not be more appropriate for our field, philology truly matters. This implies, as the subtitle indicates, that we read our texts carefully, meticulously, thoroughly, and slowly in order to gain the best possible insights (Nietzsche; here 15). As we all know, while every text represents a large range of challenges, older texts are even much more difficult to handle, whether we think of palaeographical issues, material difficulties, and linguistic and grammatical problems. Medieval Studies has always gone hand in hand with manuscript studies, so there is no question whether philology matters. It is a conditio sine qua non, but it might be relevant, after all, to re-examine the topic at hand once again and to investigate carefully what philology actually means and how it applies to everything we do in our medieval scholarship. It would be a very different question whether philology matters for the present generation, for non-medievalists, or for the modern academy, but this is not the prime purpose of this volume, although many contributors draw significantly from theoretical thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche (“Wir Philologen,” 1874/1875), Erich Auerbach (Mimesis, 1946), Ernst-Robert Curtius (Europäische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter, 1948), Paul de Man (Resistance to Theory, 1986), Hans-Georg Gadamer (Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik, 1973), and Edward Said (Humanism and Democratic Criticism, 2004).

La democracia en Polibio: una aproximación al pensamiento político en el mundo helenístico

La continuidad o decadencia de la democracia en el mundo helenístico es objeto aún hoy de contro­versia dentro de la historiografía moderna sobre el mundo antiguo. No así en la Historia de las Ideas donde el modelo ateniense constituye el centro de toda teoría de la democracia antigua. Por tanto, en filosofía política las democracias helenísticas, en comparación con Atenas, se carac­terizan por un retroceso u agotamiento de la par­ticipación popular. Sin embargo, a la luz de estu­dios recientes, es necesario relativizar el grado de decadencia de la democracia en el mundo helenís­tico y el lugar que ocupa en el pensamiento políti­co en general, y en el de Polibio en particular. El libro 2, en que se describe la historia de la Confe­deración aquea, es abundante en referencias a la democracia y parece indicar que ella ocupa un lugar central en las ideas políticas de Polibio.