Contemporary republican concepts of democracy: common features and two ideal types

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅存取

详细

The revival of the republican political tradition is taking place against the background of the academic dispute between liberals and communitarians. Сommon values of modern republicans, namely, deliberativeness of the political process and civic virtues based on the idea of the common good are defined. Views on democracy of three authors of republican orientation – M. Sandel, K. Sunstein and F. Pettit are analyzed. It is shown that the existence of different directions within the republican tradition (one focuses on the development of common ethical ideas, and the other – on mixed government) has as its consequence the heterogeneity of republicans’ ideas on democracy. It is proposed to distinguish two ideal types of republican views on democracy – narrowly communitarian and essentially liberal, and to consider as criteria for typology (1) views on the highest social ideal and human rights, (2) the purpose of democratic discourses, (3) the role and significance of agreement with political decisions, (4) the role and significance of political participation and civic virtues. It is concluded that to date a unified republican theory of democracy has not yet been formed.

全文:

受限制的访问

作者简介

Nikolai Shaveko

Institute of Philosophy and Law of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: shavekonikolai@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5481-7425

Candidate of Sciences (Law), Senior Research Fellow

俄罗斯联邦, Yekaterinburg

参考

  1. Волкова Т.П. (2004) Либералы и коммунитаристы: дискуссия о социальной справедливости продолжается // Вестник МГТУ. № 2. С. 200–207. Volkova T.P. (2004) Liberaly i kommunitaristy: diskussija o social’noj spravedlivosti prodolzhaetsja [Liberals and Communitarians: the debate on social justice continues]. Vestnik of MSTU, no. 2, pp. 200–207. (In Russ.)
  2. Даль Р. (2003) Демократия и ее критики. М.: РОССПЭН. 574 с. Dahl R. (2003) Demokratija i ee kritiki [Democracy and its critics]. Moscow: ROSSPEN. 574 p. (In Russ.)
  3. Кимлика У. (2010) Современная политическая философия: введение. М.: Изд. дом Гос. ун-та – Высшей школы экономики. 592 с. Kymlicka W. (2010) Sovremennaja politicheskaja filosofija: vvedenie. [Contemporary political philosophy: an introduction]. Moscow: Vishaya shkola economiki. 592 p. (In Russ.)
  4. Петтит Ф. (2016) Республиканизм. Теория свободы и государственного правления. М.: Изд-во Института Гайдара. 488 с. Pettit Ph. (2016) Respublikanizm. Teorija svobody i gosudarstvennogo pravlenija. [Republicanism: A Teory of Freedom and Government]. Moscow: Institut Gajdara. 488 p. (In Russ.)
  5. Сэндел М. (2013) Справедливость. Как поступать правильно? М.: МИФ. 352 c. Sandel M. (2013) Spravedlivost’. Kak postupat’ pravil’no? [Justice. What’s the right thing to do?] Moscow: MIF. 352 p. (In Russ.)
  6. Хабермас Ю. (2008) Вовлечение другого. Очерки политической теории. СПб.: Наука. 417 с. Habermas J. (2008) Vovlechenie drugogo. Ocherki politicheskoj teorii [The Inclusion of the Other]. St. Petersburg: Nauka. 417 p. (In Russ.)
  7. Шавеко Н.А. (2020) Предшествует ли право благу? (Спор между либералами и коммунитаристами) // Полития: Анализ. Хроника. Прогноз (Журнал политической философии и социологии политики). № 3 (98). С. 62–81. https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2020-98-3-62-81 Shaveko N.A. (2020) Predshestvuet li pravo blagu? (Spor mezhdu liberalami i kommunitaristami) [Does the right precede the good? (A dispute between liberals and communitarians)]. Politeia, no. 3 (98), pp. 62–81. https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2020-98-3-62-81 (In Russ.)
  8. Aronovitch H. (2000) From Communitarianism to Republicanism: On Sandel and His Critics. Canadian Journal of Philosophy. № 30(4), pp. 621–647. https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2000.10717547
  9. Cohen J. (1993) Kommunitarismus und universeller Standpunkt. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, no. 41(6), pp. 1009–1020. doi: 10.1524/dzph.1993.41.6.1009
  10. Cunningham F. (2002) Theories of Democracy: A critical introduction. London, New York: Routledge. 256 p.
  11. Kymlicka W. (1998) Liberal egalitarianism and civic republicanism: friends or enemies? Debating Democracy’s Discontent: Essays on American Politics, Law, and Public Philosophy / Allen, Anita L. and Regan, Milton C. Jr (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 131–148.
  12. Larmore Ch. (2001) A Critique of Philip Pettit’s Republicanism. In: Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy. Philosophical Issues, vol. 11, pp. 229–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-2237.2001.tb00045.x
  13. Michelman F. (1988) Law’s Republic. The Yale Law Journal, vol. 97, no. 8, pp. 1493–1537.
  14. Nusser K.-H. (2002) Expansive Demokratietheorien bei Charles Taylor, Michael Walzer und Jürgen Habermas. Zeitschrift für Politik, no. 49(3), S. 250–266.
  15. Pettit Ph. (2012) On the people’s terms: a republican theory and model of democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press. 338 p.
  16. Sandel M. (1996) Democracy’s Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. 417 p.
  17. Sandel M. (1998) Reply to critics. In: Debating Democracy’s Discontent: Essays on American Politics, Law, and Public Philosophy. Eds: Allen, Anita L. and Regan, Milton C. Jr. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 319–335.
  18. Sunstein C. (2001) Designing democracy: what constitutions do. New York: Oxford University Press. 280 p.
  19. Sunstein C.R. (1988) Beyond the Republican Revival. Yale Law Journal, vol. 97, pp. 1539–1590.
  20. Sunstein C.R. (1993а) The Enduring Legacy of Republicanism. In: A New Constitutionalism. Designing Political Institutions for a Good Society / Eds. Elkin S.L., Soltan K.E. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press, 1993. Pp. 174–206.
  21. Sunstein C.R. (1993b) The Partial Constitution. Cambridge, MA and London, UK: Harvard University Press. 414 p.
  22. Zeitgenössische Demokratietheorie. Band 1: Normative Demokratietheorien. (2012) Lembcke O.W., Ritzi C., Schaal G.S. (Hrsg.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 481 S.

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML
下载

版权所有 © Russian Academy of Sciences, 2024