Legitimate Form Of Government Research Articles

Cognitive Diversity or Cognitive Polarization? On Epistemic Democracy in a Post-Truth World

ABSTRACT Pessimism over a democracy’s ability to produce good outcomes is as longstanding as democracy itself. On one hand, democratic theorists consider democracy to be the only legitimate form of government on the basis that it alone promotes or safeguards intrinsic values like freedom, equality, and justice. On the other, skepticism toward the ordinary citizen’s cognitive capacities remains a perennial concern. Qualms about the epistemic value of democracy have only been made more pertinent by a fundamental problem of deep epistemic disagreement which underlies the post-truth phenomenon. I argue that the democratic theorists who have sought to defend democracy on epistemic grounds have thus far neglected such deep and intractable disagreements. Without addressing this oversight, the epistemic democrat will find that collective decision-making processes quickly become paralyzed and will not be able to yield the epistemic benefits they promise. Hence, the work for epistemic democrats is to recognize and take into account the ramifications of epistemic disagreements so as to make a stronger case for epistemic democracy.

Can Classical Athens Offer Lessons for a Large, Pluralistic Society?

Abstract Recoiling from the power that Athenian democracy placed in the hands of the poor, the founding fathers of the United States took Athens as primarily an anti-model, whereas nineteenth-century defenders of slavery found Athens a very congenial model indeed, seeming as it did to lend a mantle of legitimacy to an unspeakable practice. After a “honeymoon period” in which democracy was idealized as the only legitimate form of government, now at the outset of the twenty-first century the alliance of democracy with a capitalism that often proves heartless to the less fortunate has raised some troubling questions about democracy itself. Despite its small size, classical Athens offers valuable guidance for tempering current difficulties in both the United States and elsewhere by adopting and adapting the selection of some officials by sortition, direct election by popular vote of elected officials, a rigorous system of accountability, and the fostering of civic and community values.

Franklin’s Talmud: Hebraic Republicanism in the Constitutional Convention and the Debate Over Ratification, 1787-1788

Hebraic republicanism, a tradition of political thought origi-nating in the sixteenth century, found in rabbinic Judaism a set of sources and ideas that made it possible to argue that constitutional republics, with powers limited by the rule of law, were the only le-gitimate form of government. This article demonstrates that He-braic republicanism had a profound influence on the founding of America, both during the debates over the ratification of the Con-stitution and at the Federal Convention, in particular in the for-mulation of the republican government Guarantee Clause of Article IV, Section 4. This article argues that a full understanding of the Constitution must account for this important but previously unexplored chapter in the history of American constitutional thought. The American writers sound-ing Hebraist themes included many of the most significant figures of the time, among them the framer Roger Sherman, the New York Anti-Federalist leader Melancton Smith, the Anti-Federalist essayist and historian Mercy Otis Warren, and, perhaps most re-markably, Benjamin Franklin, the founders’ elder statesman, who devoted most of the sole essay he contributed to the ratification controversy to a political analysis of biblical passages, basing his ar-gument on Josephus and the Talmud. Franklin’s essay is of particu-lar interest, as his innovative use of Judaic sources demonstrates that political Hebraism —the reliance on rabbinic interpretations for political thought—not only persisted but also continued to de-velop in new ways well into late eighteenth-century America. He-braic political thought gave structure to the risks and opportunities constitution-making presented, offered a powerful set of rhetorical framings that writers and speakers deployed in the ratification struggles in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Maryland, and Virginia, and supplied the central, antimonarchist meaning of the Constitution’s Guarantee Clause. This article argues that we cannot fully comprehend either the American founding or the his-tory of political Hebraism unless we understand the role of Hebra-ic republicanism in the creation of the American Constitution.

The Universalization of “Liberal Democracy”

This article explores the concept of “liberal democracy” and the persistent attempts by Western scholars and politicians to present it as the only legitimate form of government. Observing that the popular narrative around democracy pays no attention to social class, it draws on a Marxist understanding of the state, within which framework liberal democracy is simply “the best possible political shell for capitalism,” as Lenin put it. It provides numerous examples of how Western liberal democracies privilege the interests of the ruling (capitalist) class and perpetuate a system of exploitation and oppression. It compares this with systems of socialist democracy, such as whole-process people’s democracy in China. Finally, it highlights how the universalization of liberal democracy is leveraged to prop up Western ideological hegemony, itself part of an imperialist project aimed at preserving the US-led imperialist system.

Penafsiran Ayat-Ayat Jihad dan Khilafah: Upaya Menanggulangi Paham Ekstremisme di UNIDA Gontor

Jihad to establish a Khilāfah state has again become a viral issue studied and discussed by scholars, academics, politicians and activists. Consequently, there is a tendency to consider the political system as one of the pillars of religion. The tendency to consider the Khilāfah as a legitimate form of government and guarantee the application of sharia law post the Prophet period. This is a trend that has never been known by religion and ijtihad of previous Muslims even almost causing division and destruction in many countries. This article is aimed to analyze the interpretation of verse of jihad and khilafah in university students’ point of view. It was because that students in universities have an important and strategic role in warding off the dangers of radicalism and intolerance that develop in society. Students are expected to be the important pillar to reduce the development of radicalism. University of Darussalam Gontor (UNIDA Gontor) as a boarding school with the motto of the fountain of wisdom, is expected to be able to overcome radicalism and extremism in terms of khilāfah and jihad . This study used quaitative method to gain the data.This study revealed that UNIDA Gontor students had understood the meaning of khilafah and jihad properly and correctly only some deficiencies such as references.it was not only about tolerant or in accordance with the manhaj ahlu sunnah wal jama'ah and moderate washatiyah mazhab . It stated that the khilāfah is impossible to stand again, and the need for correct references in understanding the khilāfah and jihad .

Why Did the Greeks hate the Tyrants? A Comparative View on Monarchy in Archaic Greece

Archaic tyrannies, emerging during the period of polis formation, are in many respects comparable to city-state monarchies in the eastern Mediterranean and the Near East. There is every reason to consider tyranny as a vehicle for state formation in Archaic Greece. However, Greek poleis eventually did not accept monarchy as a legitimate form of government. The article discusses the reason precluding the entrenchment of sole rule in Archaic Greek poleis, conditioned by the relative egalitarianism of the society evolving from the Early Iron Age.

Demokracja i mizantropia. Przemiany wyobrażeń na temat ludu a problem intelektualnego uprawomocnienia demokracji

CEL NAUKOWY: Celem tego artykułu jest analiza związku między wy‑ obrażeniami z zakresu antropologii filozoficznej a problemem intelektualnej prawomocności demokracji.
 PROBLEM I METODY BADAWCZE: W artykule próbuję odpowiedzieć na pytanie, jaki jest związek między poglądami na temat natury ludzkiej a sto‑ sunkiem do demokracji. Analizuję ten problem interpretując klasyczne dzieła z zakresu myśli politycznej.
 PROCES WYWODU: Punktem wyjścia jest konstatacja: niechęć wobec demo‑ kracji wyrastała w dużej mierze z mizantropii. Demokracja nie była uznawana za ustrój godny poparcia, ponieważ nie wierzono w racjonalność zwykłego czło‑ wieka i jego zdolność do odpowiedzialnego uczestnictwa w życiu publicznym. Ta sytuacja zmienia się w epoce Oświecenia, kiedy to podważono pesymizm antropologiczny i sformułowane zostały teorie stanowiące podstawę dla idei intelektualnej prawomocności demokracji. Późniejszy bieg wypadków w du‑ żym stopniu te teorie zakwestionował, ale mimo to demokracja na Zachodzie uznawana jest za jedyną prawomocną formę rządu.
 WYNIKI ANALIZY NAUKOWEJ: Analiza prowadzi do sformułowania poglądu o paradoksalnym charakterze współczesnej demokracji. Z jednej stro‑ ny, istnieje konsensus co do intelektualnej prawomocności demokracji, z dru‑ giej – w teorii i praktyce powszechnie kwestionowana jest zdolność zwykłego człowieka do rozumnego uczestnictwa w życiu publicznym.
 WNIOSKI, INNOWACJE, REKOMENDACJE: Wyniki analizy powinny skłonić politologa do zmiany sposobu rozumienia charakteru współczesnej demo‑ kracji. Ustrój ten nosi nazwę demokracja, ale wydaje się mieć coraz mniej wspól‑ nego z nadziejami tych autorów, którzy sformułowali jej intelektualne założenia.

Democracy and prosperity: reinventing capitalism through a turbulent century

The fall of the Berlin Wall generated a widespread consensus that democracy had become the only legitimate form of government and that—sooner or later—all countries would adopt it. Since the 2008 economic crisis, belief in the triumphant march of democratic governance has evaporated, and the political systems of advanced nations now look much more fragile than they did in the past. Challenged by new populist movements domestically, they no longer appeal to other countries—many have begun to argue that the alliance between capitalism and democracy is no longer able to deliver on expectations. Torben Iversen and David Soskice do not share these concerns. On the contrary, they argue that the coalition between consolidated democracies and capitalism is solid and prosperous. The keyword they use to describe it is resilience. This quality has allowed advanced capitalist democracies to survive political challenges from competing regimes—notably fascism and communism—and to withstand, despite severe damage, major economic crises, including those in 1929 and 2008. The authors note that cases where wealthy democratic states reverted to authoritarian regimes are the exception. Moreover, the club of consolidated democratic nations has progressively managed to acquire new members, including Japan and South Korea in the east and several countries in southern and eastern Europe.

Explaining the Arab Uprisings: transformations in Comparative Perspective

Drawing on the research presented by contributors to this special issue, this article assesses the analytic opportunities that emerge when the Arab uprisings are conceptualized as moments of transformation rather than as incipient, flawed or failed transitions to democracy. Highlighting critical issues that cut across and link the experiences of political relevant elites (PREs) and mobilized publics in the cases of Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and Yemen, it identifies three sets of issues that warrant further comparative research: the effects of stateness and patterns of state-society relations on the trajectory of Arab uprisings; the role of identity politics and non-state forms of solidarity as drivers of political mobilization and collective action, and the impact of these forms of collective action on possibilities for establishing stable, legitimate forms of governance; and the limits of civil societies and civic sectors in influencing transformational processes.

Benchmarking International, Transnational, and Private Governance in the Forest Sector

The question of how to overcome the democratic deficits of global forms of governance has led to a pretentious academic debate. To proceed in theory-building, we need to assign systematically the theory-driven assumptions on legitimate forms of governance beyond the nation-state with the various, already observable forms of global governance. Thereto, the paper is aiming at a systematic comparative appraisal of the legitimatory quality of different patterns of governance by applying suitable indicators for their measurement. The innovative potential of this paper is the application of a structured, focused comparison that interconnects a multi-dimensional concept of legitimacy (input-, throughput- and outputdimension) with the triad of international, transnational and private forms of governance. As far as the chosen indicators show a legitimizing effect, they should serve as a standard for upcoming research studies and, by this, contribute to further systematization of studies on global governance. At least, the analysis of the constitutive criteria of cross-border governance arrangements in a legitimacy-based theoretical perspective shall also help to identify their discrete potential for legitimacy and indicate ways for their institutional safeguard and transformation to other arrangements. The conceptual outline will be completed by a case study on forest governance.

Governing Insecurity: Democratic Control of Military and Security Establishments in Transitional Democracies

In the post-Cold War era democratic institutions have widely come to be regarded as the only legitimate forms of governance. But the longstanding legacies of military rule cast a shadow over many newly instituted democratic regimes. Moreover, the fact that many societies have experienced an erosion of order and government disintegration under the pressures of violent conflict and internal war poses some intractable obstacles or challenges to the institutionalisation of democracy and human security.

Will Kymlicka ‘Multicultural citizenship within multination states’: A response

Will Kymlicka's diagnosis of the dilemmas involved in integrating culturally dis tinct immigrant groups into multinational societies is characteristically acute, and in this comment I take for granted the basic parameters of his discussion: namely that some version of federalism is the only legitimate form of government in such societies, and that the cultural integration of immigrant groups is an important goal of social policy, in education and elsewhere. This is tantamount to saying that we share the view that questions of collective identity are important, and cannot be sidestepped, as some liberals would advocate, by arguing that so long as the state respects human rights and treats its citizens as equals, no further questions of legitimacy arise. Our philosophical starting points are similar, therefore, and our political dis agreements (which are not great) arise from somewhat different estimates of the likely future of multination states as he describes them. According to Kymlicka, these states 'contain deep and unresolved cleavages around national identity and nationhood'. These cleavages have been handled by developing institutions that give a considerable degree of autonomy to minority nations separate parliaments, for example that allow them to assert their distinct identities and protect their separate interests in areas such as language policies. However, relations between the different national groups remain troubled: what we have are 'at best provisional settlements of these long-standing cleavages, not permanent resolutions', with some nationalists continuing to favour outright secession and others arguing for further transfers of power from central government to devolved institutions. In other words we have a modus vivendi between the various national groups whose precise shape will change over time as different constituencies press their claims. This might seem a recipe for instability, but according to Kymlicka 'most citizens in multination western states take this indeterminacy and contestation in their stride'.

The Global Rise of Democracy

We examine the influence of an interstate network created by intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) on the global diffusion of democracy. We propose that IGOs facilitate democracy’s diffusion by transmitting information between member states and by interpreting that information according to prevailing norms in the world society, where democracy is viewed as the legitimate form of government. We employ a network autocorrelation model to track changes in democracy among all of the world’s countries from 1815 to 2000. We find that democracy does diffuse through the IGO network and that the influence of democratic countries is stronger than that of undemocratic countries. Evidence indicates that the IGO network serves as a basis for normative diffusion. This is an important contribution to sociological accounts of globalization, which tend to emphasize diffusion divorced from network structure or diffusion dependent on the coercive influence of a small set of international organizations.

Exclusivist Republicanism and the Non-Monarchical Republic

The idea that a republic is the only legitimate form of government and that non-elective monarchy and hereditary political privileges are by definition illegitimate is an artifact of late eighteenth century republicanism, though it has roots in the “godly republics” of the seventeenth century. It presupposes understanding a republic ( respublica) to be a non-monarchical form of government. The latter definition is a discursive practice that goes back only to the fifteenth century and is not found in Roman or medieval sources. This article explains how the definition emerged in Renaissance Italy.

La Oficina del Gobernante: aportes para fortalecer los procesos de conducción política de las organizaciones públicas

In recent decades, Latin American countries have adopted democracy as the only legitimate form of government. In spite of this, citizens seem to have lost hope in politics and its ability to transform reality. Politics does not manage to satisfactorily focus or impact on the problems of society. The challenge of improving democratic institutions is increasingly stronger. This article claims that we are facing a governance crisis. This crisis is due to the fact that politics lacks the right tools to improve the governability of the system it conducts. The article suggest a way of dealing with the issue of governance in Latin American countries through two channels: 1) strengthening specific training in governance and 2) developing tools for the Government Office to improve direction, efficiency and relevance of the government project.

La Oficina del Gobernante: aportes para fortalecer los procesos de conducción política de las organizaciones públicas

In recent decades, Latin American countries have adopted democracy as the only legitimate form of government. In spite of this, citizens seem to have lost hope in politics and its ability to transform reality. Politics does not manage to satisfactorily focus or impact on the problems of society. The challenge of improving democratic institutions is increasingly stronger. This article claims that we are facing a governance crisis. This crisis is due to the fact that politics lacks the right tools to improve the governability of the system it conducts. The article suggest a way of dealing with the issue of governance in Latin American countries through two channels: 1) strengthening specific training in governance and 2) developing tools for the Government Office to improve direction, efficiency and relevance of the government project.

From politics to good management? Transforming the local welfare state in Italy

In light of recent welfare reforms associated with new forms of managerial and financial accountability, this paper analyses the significance for the construction of new legitimate forms of governance of the relationship between public managers of welfare provider units and local elected politicians. The shift from local government as democratic representative institutions to depoliticised efficient agent of welfare provision has created in Italy the opportunity for the emergence of a new cadre of managers, less subject to interference by the parties. The increasingly problematic relationship between managers and politicians reflects the dynamics of a shifting game, originally intended for sector-specific interests, that was later transformed into a struggle between political elites across territory and about territorial politics. Any set of alternatives juxtaposing efficient management and politics is best viewed by taking account of the significance of local welfare institutions for political legitimacy.

Promoting Democracy: The Challenge of Creating a Civil Society

AbstractPerhaps the most notable feature of "democracy" today is its almost universal acceptance as the only legitimate form of government. Most examples of open dissent against this view are so patently self-interested as to command little respect. Yet however attractive it may be, the development of modern democracy has been largely an incremental product of Europe and its colonial diaspora, which embody quite specific cultural and social assumptions. Now these states have become dedicated to democracy's extension around the world. This paper examines the nature and success of these attempts to extend democracy. It asks, in particular, whether the culture of a robust civil society on which democracy relies can be successfully exported and what challenges it faces from more traditional social relationships.

Subsidiarity, Democracy, and Human Rights in the Constitutional Treaty of Europe

The central tasks of a constitution are to establish and limit political authority.This is why a de facto or written constitution is often regarded as a central condition for legitimate rule. A perceived need to enhance the legitimacy of the European Union (EU) also motivated the member states of the EU to initiate a process that led to the creation of the Constitutional Treaty of Europe (CTE), a document that currently receives a mixed reception among the citizenry. In particular, majorities in referendums in France and the Netherlands rejected the CTE.The following reflections concern whether three particular arrangements of this Constitutional Treaty indeed increase the normative legitimacy of the EU. The mechanisms that increase subsidiarity, democracy, and human rights do enhance the legitimacy of the EU, but they are incompletely developed in the document; they stand in some internal tension, and seem partly at odds with standard normative theory. These challenges may also be relevant for other attempts at creating other transnational, legitimate forms of governance at the regional or global levels.