This paper delves into the nuances of political administration within the Indic tradition, specifically examining the Janapada, or ancient city-states, to shed light on the essence of statecraft in India. It challenges the overwhelmingly limited engagement with Western political theory when applied to Indian contexts, echoing Bhikhu Parekh’s argument that contemporary non-Western societies have not successfully generated original political theory of their own. The analysis of Indian political thought presents a compelling case for embracing indigenous perspectives that intertwine ethical and spiritual dimensions, as illustrated by influential thinkers such as Kautilya and modern figures like Mahatma Gandhi. The paper outlines the evolution of statehood in ancient India, offering significant insights into governance and underscoring the critical role of cultural context in shaping political discourse. Ultimately, this study advocates for a transformative re-evaluation of Indian political theory that transcends the limitations of Western paradigms, aiming to uncover frameworks that resonate with India's unique socio-political realities.

ABSTRACT Political actors often associate themselves with positively valenced historical figures (e.g., Martin Luther King Jr., Jesus) and opponents with negatively valenced figures (e.g., Hitler, Stalin). What factors shape Americans’ understandings of such figures’ ideological orientations? To what extent are these understandings grounded in facts versus figures’ colloquial valence as “heroes” or “villains”? And what are the implications? Drawing on group-identity theories of politics and original nationally representative data in which we had Americans rate historical figures on the left–right ideological spectrum, our analyses revealed three key findings. First, Americans’ placement of historical figures appears far more driven by their valence as heroes/villains and their connection to in-group/out-group biases than where such figures would intuitively be placed in light of facts about them or how they were perceived in their time (e.g., left-right ratings for fascist and communist leaders correlate strongly). Second, the strongest predictors of figure placement and polarization are Americans’ own ideological and partisan in-group commitments. Third, group differences in Americans’ ideological placement of “villains” are more extreme than that of “heroes,” suggesting heroes/villains serve as proxies for common in-group/out-group biases. Findings complicate research on the contested nature of history and suggest how historical figures serve different purposes in contemporary partisan rhetoric.

ABSTRACT This paper contributes to urban political theory by drawing on Foucault’s concept of a ‘micro-physics of power’ and his genealogy of political rationality. Conceptually, it develops the notion of spatio-temporalization to reflect on the power of space and time; and genealogically, it examines the relationship between modern state formation and urbanization. Overall, the paper argues that the modern city emerges from a dialectical interplay of statist spatio-temporal homogenization and closure, and urban spatio-temporal heterogenization and initiation. This perspective enables to understand the unique political characteristics of city life and demonstrates the analytical value of space and time in political theory.

Purpose Recent debates in library and information science have cast neutrality and social justice as irreconcilable–like oil and water. This paper challenges that view, advocating for balanced librarianship, where diverse values are negotiated through an ongoing democratic process. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on political philosophy, it warns that treating values as absolute, enforcing rigid definitions and overemphasizing incompatibility risk sliding toward authoritarian forms of librarianship. Findings This viewpoint highlights three principles of democratic librarianship. First, it should be acknowledged that librarianship as a concept is open to multiple interpretations. Second, democratic librarianship should be grounded in more than one core value. Third, democratic librarianship is an ongoing negotiation between library professionals, politicians and citizens, because democracy is an unfinished project. Originality/value By situating the neutrality–social justice debate within broader political theory, this paper reveals its parallels with the tension between liberalism (neutrality) and state perfectionism (social justice). It further grounds the case for balance in the work of Karl Popper, Chantal Mouffe, Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida offering a philosophical framework for resisting authoritarian tendencies while embracing diversity.

This paper examines Health System Resilience (HSR) through a political science lens, arguing that the capacity of health systems to become resilient is shaped not only by technical capabilities and available resources but also by the political theories underpinning health systems and health policy. While HSR has gained prominence in health research as a concept, its integration with political theories remains limited - particularly within political science literature. Drawing on a scoping review, the paper finds that political dimensions - such as governance and leadership, institutional path dependency, and power dynamics - are rarely and unevenly addressed in the literature. Most sources adopt a fragmented view of policy and politics, infrequently identifying the Political Determinants of Health (PDoH) systematically or analysing them through robust political theory. As a result, resilience is often depoliticised and treated as a managerial issue rather than a contested political process. In light of these findings, the paper proposes new opportunities to scrutinise how HSR is shaped by the interplay of actors, ideas, and institutions. In doing so, it contributes to developing a political science of health that fosters stronger interdisciplinary engagement. The paper calls on political scientists to engage more proactively with public health scholarship to support politically informed and more effective resilience strategies.

Abstract In the literature, the Rule of Law (ROL) is mainly explained, and its value justified, by reference to its support for a liberal conception of human agency. As such, the connection between the ROL and legitimacy is normally considered contingent if the conception of the ROL is thin. It can be rendered necessary, it seems, only by a substantive conception that incorporates other political ideals, notably democracy. Without recourse to such a move, this article defends a necessary ROL-legitimacy connection by exploring the ROL’s contribution to the task of pacification, which, I argue, is inherent in the claim of legitimacy. My interpretation re-orients the ROL’s foundational value from the liberal conception of human agency to politically inspired fear and summa mala . The paradigmatic shift is in line with the realism approach to political theory which derives and explains moral claims in political theories from considerations of basic political necessity.

James Frame was a nineteenth century Scotsman, psychiatric patient, and author. He published two books during his lifetime, the Philosophy of Insanity and the Asylum Diaries, which detail his lived experience as a patient at the Glasgow Royal Lunatic Asylum. This book review-essay engages with recent scholarship on Frame to argue that these recently re-published writings offer more than historical curiosity: they articulate a consistent philosophy of madness and a political theory of care that continues to be relevant for contemporary psychiatry. Frame's testimony provides a rare first-hand account of the Scottish "no-restraint" movement, prefiguring both anti-psychiatry and patient-centered care, while foregrounding the therapeutic significance of environment, community, and the relational dynamics they foster. At the same time, Frame's work develops a singular ethics, epistemology, and ontology of madness, insisting that reason and unreason are not opposed but entwined, thus demonstrating that the ontological impropriety of any singular life-what the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben calls its "exemplarity"-is what makes it most common. By analyzing Frame's synthesis of testimonial combined with practical, philosophical, and political insight, as well as recent historical and clinical scholarship on his works, the review-essay shows how his writings anticipate both psychoanalytic concepts such as transference, as well as ethical critiques of profit-driven health systems. The piece concludes that Frame's work remains a conceptual resource for rethinking the intertwined epistemological, ethical, and political dimensions of psychiatry in the 21st century.

The current review attempts to unify the concept of criticality (as introduced by Cameron, 2000) as a linguistic tool used within the pragmatics of language interpretation that can be employed as a methodology shared by both linguistic and literary analyses. Both CDA and literary analysts use the same armamentarium when it comes to uncovering the power dynamics and hidden ideologies within a given text and the ideological orientations of the text reducers. However, the concept of criticality is utilized under different terminologies in linguistics pragmatics and literary analyses. In pragmatics, it is referred to as critical analysis of discourse, meaning to comment on the discourse producer’s intention within various contextual cues to uncover the hidden meaning and to demonstrate the power dynamics of the discourse. On the other hand, in literary analyses, it is manifested through the use of ‘political theory’ or ‘ideological theory’. The tools, by nature, are different in literature and pragmatics due to the functions of analysis, yet the theorists of all the above-mentioned terms are the same, i.e., Althusser, Foucault, Said, Gramisci, and others. Two examples are taken from linguistic pragmatics analysis and literature to be analyzed according to the same concept of criticality. Both examples yield similar justifications for the use of language in shaping power dynamics and discourse-meaning negotiation as well as uncovering the hidden ideologies of text producers under the multi-layered texts.

In recent decades, political theorists have drawn on historical thinkers to explore how political elites can be held accountable. Rousseau, however, is often dismissed as reducing accountability to elections and participation to occasional ratification referenda. This article challenges that view. While Rousseau expected an elective aristocracy to execute laws ratified by the people, he also identified two mechanisms—scrutiny and recall—through which citizens could control these representatives. After reconstructing Rousseau’s account, I consider how these mechanisms could be adapted to contemporary democracies. Focused on executive accountability, the model is particularly suited to presidential systems with directly elected presidents. It combines a national jury—a citizens’ assembly chosen by lot and tasked with examining presidential actions—with the possibility of a recall referendum. By uniting deliberative scrutiny with the power to remove the head of state, this approach offers an underexplored complement to recent anti-oligarchic institutional innovations based on sortition.

The Nigerian public sector remains central to governance, development, and service delivery, yet its capacity is persistently undermined by bureaucratic bottlenecks, corruption, weak institutional frameworks, and inconsistent reforms. This article interrogates the nexus between public sector reforms, bureaucratic practices, and effective service delivery in Nigeria, with a focus on how structural inefficiencies continue to frustrate reform outcomes. Relying on a mixed-method approach that integrates empirical data from field surveys, documentary analysis, and secondary sources, the study critically examines reform trajectories from the post-independence era to contemporary times. It identifies major reform efforts such as the Udoji Commission (1974), Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) of the 1980s, SERVICOM (2004), and ongoing digital governance initiatives, highlighting their limited success in transforming the bureaucracy into an efficient service provider. The article further draws on theories of public choice, institutionalism, and bureaucratic politics to explain persistent challenges. Findings reveal that reforms often fail due to political interference, lack of continuity, weak monitoring frameworks, and resistance from entrenched bureaucratic elites. To address these challenges, the paper recommends strengthening institutional accountability, promoting digital governance, decentralizing service delivery, and fostering leadership commitment to reform implementation. The study contributes to the broader discourse on governance in Africa by situating Nigeria’s experiences within global comparative contexts, while providing pragmatic policy options for enhancing efficiency, transparency, and responsiveness in public administration.

This article re-examines Hobbesian sovereignty and Kropotkinian mutual aid under the extreme conditions of post-collapse life. It introduces the “scarred original position,” a concept in which actors do not enter as abstract individuals but as survivors marked by the memory of systemic catastrophe. This reframing alters the classical premises: Hobbes’s state of nature becomes a remembered possibility rather than an imminent experience, while Kropotkinian sociability is tempered by the historical fragility of reciprocity. For Hobbes, coherence is preserved through the creation of a “cold covenant”: a pre-emptive, deliberated, and ritualized act of instituting authority before crisis erupts. Historical memory replaces immediacy as the ground of fear, ensuring that sovereignty remains ontologically Hobbesian even when founded on foresight. Kropotkinian mutual aid, by contrast, retains coherence through its refusal of domination and its emphasis on reciprocity, though it must accept vulnerability and fragility as integral to its fidelity. In dialog, the two models show that both can maintain coherence under collapse, but only in scarred form. Hobbesian sovereignty is haunted by memories of failed Leviathans, while anarchist communitarianism is haunted by its precariousness. The scarred original position thus reveals that post-collapse political orders emerge not from pure beginnings but from inherited fears, solidarities, and traumas.

During moments of institutional change, advocates and critics of reform are forced to publicly and privately articulate why their city should consider or avoid a proposed change. These arguments for and against reform rely on assumptions about the character and purpose of municipal politics—the relevant cleavages, the proper purposes to which municipal politics is directed, and the character of municipal political representation. Moments of reform thus reveal the “implicit theories” of urban politics held by the individuals involved—an opportunity to peer behind quotidian policy debates and explore how local political elites think about the character and purposes of municipal politics. To this end, this article explores implicit theories of urban politics in Calgary, Alberta, during the early post-war period in which the city abandoned its proportional representation, partisan, and at-large electoral system and adopted single-member majoritarian ward-based politics. Combining quantitative electoral data with qualitative archival and newspaper material, the author describes how long-term shifts in electoral competition combined with changing conceptions about the purposes of local politics—especially among the labour movement and urban left in Calgary—to produce a period of major reform. The author shows how these changes reflect changing theories of urban politics, originating in particular configurations of local institutions, in Canadian cities in the early post-war era.

In the context of cross-Strait integrated development, agricultural cooperation policies between the Chinese mainland and Taiwan are intended to serve as key instruments for integration. However, these policies frequently encounter an implementation dilemma in which higher-level authorities actively promote policy goals while grassroots governments respond primarily through symbolic actions. Existing studies have largely explained this phenomenon from static perspectives, such as resource constraints or individual motivation, but have paid insufficient attention to how defensive compliance and distorted feedback interact to sustain systemic implementation failure. To address this gap, this study adopts political systems theory and conceptualizes policy implementation as a dynamic process involving input, conversion, output, and feedback. Using a comparative case study of two counties, supported by semi-structured interviews, participant observation, and document analysis, the study examines how local governments process politically sensitive policy mandates under conditions of high political pressure and resource mismatch. The findings show that contradictory inputs create strong risk-avoidance incentives, leading local governments to adopt defensive compliance strategies during the conversion stage. Through symbolic implementation, resource diversion, and responsibility shifting, policies are translated into formally compliant but substantively hollow outputs. These symbolic outputs generate distorted feedback that conceals implementation failures and prevents higher-level authorities from making corrective adjustments, thereby trapping the policy system in a state of suspended implementation and apparent stability. Theoretically, this study extends political systems theory by revealing how defensive compliance and feedback distortion function as adaptive mechanisms that sustain system persistence while undermining substantive policy performance. Practically, it provides important insights for enhancing governance effectiveness and preventing systemic implementation failure in politically sensitive policy domains.

Mandate is a site of political framing crucial to understanding the potential in a policy window. Yet the multiple uses of the word mandate, by government and advocates, suggests a more complex array of meanings and deployments than presumed on the surface. In this paper we sought to analyse how mandate was variously deployed by multiple policy actors in the lead up to and at a significant drug policy window (the 2024 NSW Drug Summit). We aimed to explore its uses and meanings and how these make possible or constrain policy reform. Data were drawn from March 2023 to April 2025, and included political documents, media documents, and material from the drug summit itself. We analysed these data using political theories of election mandates and role mandates. As a concept, mandate variously referred to the privileges and responsibilities conferred by election results, the range and meaning of election promises, and the processes of policymaking during a term of government. Mandates were operationalised through their being 'sensed'; defined through pre-election promises that direct, limit, and defer action, and constrain scope; and derived from, variously, votes, collective decision-making, and evidence. At the summit, meanings of election promises were contested: whether the mandate was confined to (merely) holding the summit, or whether the summit could deliver a mandate for future policy reform. The use of mandate by politicians reveals the conditions that get set around policy change. The use of mandate by advocates suggests that expectations of policy events are different to those of government. Appreciating how mandate is multiply used and comes to have effects opens avenues for maximising the opportunity in policy windows.

John Locke and Thomas Paine represent two distinct yet related efforts to respond to the theological-political problem. Though the thought of Thomas Paine has often been juxtaposed against John Locke with respect to issues such as limited government, democratic ideals, and constitutional principles, the theological-political thought of these two early modern political thinkers has not often been connected. This essay argues that, while Paine and Locke essentially agree about the inadequacy of traditional and orthodox forms of Christianity to accommodate the needs of a modern and liberal political order, Paine deepens and radicalizes Locke’s critique of Christianity by calling not for its redefinition in accordance with Enlightenment precepts but for its complete abolition. While Locke believed that Christianity, if stripped of its dogmas and liberalized, could be made to coexist with his vision of political order, Paine insisted that any such compromises with Christianity endangered fundamental democratic and liberal principles. Deism, as Paine understood it, represented the only acceptable political theology for a modern, liberal, and democratic society. By comparing the theological and political ideas of John Locke and Thomas Paine, this essay reveals important points of continuity within the thought of these two very different early modern political theorists. And yet, by outlining Paine’s challenge not only to traditional Christianity but even to Locke’s “enlightened” conception of Christianity, this essay also raises important questions about the internal consistency of Locke’s approach to the theological-political problem. Paine’s radical critique of Christianity in all its forms—orthodox or “enlightened”—suggests the presence within early modern political thought of influential voices whose liberal political philosophy required more than merely freedom of religion but instead demanded freedom from religion itself.

Islamic thought paradoxically addresses human dignity. Two competing moral anthropologies within Islamic intellectual discourse, Sufi mystical ethics and militant extremist absolutism, are examined in this article. It argues that these traditions approach human rights and dignity differently. This study draws upon classical Sufi metaphysics, modern political theory, and contemporary case studies of ISIS, Al-Qaida, Taliban and Pakistani TTP to understand the violence patterns. It demonstrates that Sufi ethics grounds human worth in an expansive ontology of divine mercy and unity. In this way, Sufi ethics generates an implicit universalism compatible with modern human rights frameworks. On the Contrary, militant extremism places a human value on ideological conformity and constructs a conditional and exclusionary anthropology. Such an extreme dispensation negates universal dignity. This study contributes to contemporary debates on human rights and religion, particularly Muslims, who have received many weird tags despite having the most convincing and logical faith today and ever. This paper seeks to reframe extremism not merely as political violence but as a radically different vision of what it means to be human.

The concept of statelessness is typically framed as a legalistic issue caused by displacement or migration. This state-focussed lens serves to marginalise the experiences of the de facto stateless and those whose experiences fall outside the legalistic binary of citizen or de jure stateless. This article works to disrupt these tendencies by conceptualising the intra-national issues of ‘unbelonging’ and lack of political agency in Haiti as a phenomenon of de facto statelessness. In doing so, this article reframes the colonial ramifications of Western interventionism in Haiti and their exacerbation of the effects of the 2010 earthquake and loss of voting since 2016 as a crisis of de facto statelessness. Through engagement with the political theory of Hannah Arendt, leveraged alongside the writings of post-colonial Haitian authors, this article recentres the experiences of individuals in Haiti as deeply affected by political disenfranchisement and unbelonging.

This study examines the historical evolution of Indian political tradition from the normative doctrine of Rajadharma to the modern constitutional principle of constitutional morality. It challenges the widely held assumption that Indian democracy is merely a colonial transplant by arguing that ethical governance traditions embedded in ancient and medieval political thought shaped India's democratic imagination. Using a qualitative historical-analative methodology, the study draws upon classical political treatises, ancient political traditions, epics, medieval statecraft practices, colonial constitutional developments, and Constituent Assembly debates. The paper demonstrates that while constitutional morality marks a decisive institutional transformation-particularly in its commitment to egalitarian citizenship and popular sovereignty-it also retains core normative continuities with Rajadharma, including ethical restraint, welfare orientation, and accountability. However, it simultaneously rejects hierarchical social ordering inherent in earlier traditions. The study concludes that Indian democratic ethos is historically layered rather than civilizationally ruptured, representing a complex synthesis of indigenous political ethics and modern constitutional liberalism. The findings contribute to interdisciplinary debates in political theory, history, constitutional studies, and democratic ethics.

Purpose This paper aims to address the integrity gap in current environmental, social and governance (ESG) frameworks regarding the divide between firms’ environmental performance and their fiscal behaviour. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a critical-theorist research design underpinned by a systematic literature review methodology to develop a novel conceptual model, using the theory-building approach, which links tax footprint to climate policy coherence as well as how corporate fiscal commitment affects ESG integrity and legitimacy, using the lens of institutional, legitimacy and political economy theories. It integrates existing knowledge and identifies gaps that warrant new theoretical constructs. Findings This conceptual paper finds that a firm’s tax footprint encourages corporate fiscal commitment and climate policy coherence. Tax footprint drives climate policy coherence through corporate fiscal commitment. Greater corporate fiscal commitment strengthens ESG integrity and legitimacy. The findings imply that without a clear application of fiscal aspects, the ESG frameworks would unintentionally support greenwashing and cause policy incoherence. The proposed model explains how open tax activities strengthen corporate credibility and increase the capacity of the population to access climate finance. Research limitations/implications The proposed model reveals five theoretical suppositions that can undergo empirical testing in subsequent research. Practical implications Firms should align their tax behaviours with climate goals to reinforce stakeholder trust and governance integrity. Regulators and standard setters should embed fiscal indicators, such as tax footprint, in ESG reporting to enhance accountability in sustainable finance. ESG rating agencies should incorporate fiscal legitimacy as a distinct evaluation pillar. Governments negotiating climate finance commitments should recognise that corporate fiscal responsibility directly affects national capacity to fund adaptation and mitigation. Social implications This study enhances public resource availability for climate action. It exposes how firms can appear environmentally responsible while depleting tax revenues through fiscal opacity. It highlights direct harm to citizens who depend on public funding for education, healthcare and climate adaptation. The proposed fiscal legitimacy framework strengthens the social contract between communities and firms. Originality/value This conceptual study challenges existing studies that treat tax behaviour as an outcome or a moderating variable. It introduces “fiscal legitimacy” as a new theoretical construct, arguing that tax transparency ought to be an autonomous dimension of ESG. The study goes beyond practical guidance on tax transparency and develops a theoretical conceptual model that positions tax behaviour as a prerequisite for climate policy coherence under Sustainable Development Goal 13.

From Empirical to Experimental Political Theory