Free Speech,Political Equality,and Campaign Finance Reform: A Paradox for Democracy?

Liberty to speak free of government interference and political equality are both essential to democracy. Yet political equality requires governmental regulation of resources needed for political speech. Analysis of Supreme Court cases, supplemented by considerations from democratic theory, suggest that this apparent paradox is better understood as a tension within the idea of free speech itself: between liberty to speak and the need for government to oversee fair distribution of resources necessary for politically effective speech. Although it is a tension worth negotiating with care, democracy simply requires fairness in distribution of politically relevant resources. The Supreme Court has erred in not reading the Constitution as mandating political equality as a fundamental right, and also in not incorporating real political equality as a compelling state interest. Therefore, the public should seek a 28th Amendment that would mandate political equality regardless of economic circumstance as a fundamental right, and inscribe into the document, for the first time, the word “democracy.”     

The Apollo 8 Genesis Reading and Religion in the Space Age

Between January 1969 and the summer of 1975, NASA received over eight million letters and petition signatures supporting the right of American astronauts to free religious expression in space. Prompted by Madalyn Murray O'Hair's complaints about the reading of Genesis during the flight of Apollo 8, the petition campaign points to the complex ambivalent relationship between religious Americans and their nation's space program. The Genesis reading had provided reassurance that the program, with its secular motivations, its instrumental culture, and its designs upon God's very heavens, was not hostile to faith. But what if NASA now yielded to O'Hair? The petitions flowed in the eschatological anxiety that the sacred space of the skies might be cleared of Christian speech.     

In the Shadow of Brexit: The 2019 European Parliament Elections as First‐Order Polity Elections?

European Parliament (EP) elections have traditionally been described as ‘second‐order national elections' in which campaigns are fought by national parties on national issues. We argue that the 2019 elections should instead be considered ‘first‐order polity' elections. It is not EU‐level party politics or policy issues that are debated, but rather the legitimacy of the EU itself. Firstly, the EP elections have transformed into an EU ‘blame game' in which national governments are punished or rewarded over their stance on European integration. Secondly, the 2019 election was about the EU's fundamental values, not only with respect to multiculturalism, but also gender equality and LGBTQ rights. Finally, these first‐order polity elections are driven in large part by traditional news and social media platforms. While this is a long way from the patterns of the early EP elections, they still fail in fulfilling the function of holding MEPs and European party groupings adequately to account.     

The Multicultural State We're In: Muslims, 'Multiculture' and the 'Civic Re-balancing' of British Multiculturalism

British multiculturalism is alleged to have buckled under various Muslim-related pressures. Indeed, some intellectuals, commentators and politicians of different political persuasions have pointed to evidence of a 'retreat' to be found in an increased governmental emphasis upon 'integration' and 'social cohesion'. One response to these developments, from defenders of diversity-related politics, has comprised a discursive reorientation of British multiculturalism to focus upon an anti-essentialist 'multiculture' that can transcend the alleged hitherto reification of British multiculturalism. This article offers an alternative appraisal of British multiculturalism. We contest the idea that British multiculturalism is subject to a wholesale 'retreat' and suggest instead that it has been, and continues to be, subject to a productive critique that is resulting in something best characterised as a 'civic re-balancing'. Simultaneously, and rather than seeking comfort in a depoliticised 'multiculture' view, we defend the ideal of a dynamic political multiculturalism, comprised of a body of discourses and policies originating from a racial equality paradigm inaugurated by the first Race Relations Act (1965). It is argued that this tradition has successfully and legislatively embedded a recognition of 'difference'– with the goal of promoting equality of access and opportunity – into Britain's self-image which has led to some significant accommodations for certain groups. Muslim minorities are currently appealing to this tradition as one means of achieving greater civic inclusion.     

Multicultural accommodation and the ideal of non-domination

What normative principles should multicultural states be guided by in responding to minority claims for the accommodation of cultural and religious social practices? This article explores how theories of non-domination can contribute to debates on this question in the multiculturalism literature. It examines Philip Pettit’s, Cecile Laborde’s and Frank Lovett’s republican theories and argues that non-domination-based approaches to multicultural accommodation are more suitable to assess the dynamic of intra- and inter-group relations than the prominent liberal–multiculturalist alternative. However, their advantages are not contingent on the wider theories from which they emerge, but rather related to generalizable features of the non-domination ideal. This suggests that non-domination should also be appealing to non-republicans, who can adopt it minimally as a critical principle to determine illegitimate policies.     

Civic integration in Western Europe: three debates

Since the late 1990s, civic integration has become the dominant immigrant integration policy in Western Europe. This article reviews three debates surrounding the new policy: first, whether there is policy convergence or persistent variation along national models of integration; secondly, whether civic integration marks a retreat from multiculturalism, or is merely layered on resilient multiculturalist policies; and, thirdly, whether the new policy is liberal or illiberal, and whether it entails a return of cultural assimilation. It is argued that civic integration converges cross-nationally with respect to policy goals and instruments, while extant variation is often incoherent or touching more on the form than the substance of policy; that civic integration is national-level policy that tends to coexist with ongoing de facto multiculturalism, especially at local level; and that civic integration mostly remains in a liberal register, as it is still integration and not assimilation, which would connote forced identity change.     

Progressiveness and the New Right: The Electoral Relevance of Culturally Progressive Values in the Netherlands

Whereas electoral support for new-rightist parties is often understood as driven by ethnocentric anti-immigrant sentiments, scholars have noted that new-rightist politicians have, surprisingly, stressed culturally progressive arguments in the last decade. Using recent Dutch survey data (N = 1,302) especially collected for this purpose, the article analyses the electoral relevance of three types of cultural progressiveness for voting for the new right and their relation to the well-documented anti-immigrant agenda. The analysis shows that neither moral progressiveness nor aversion to public interference of religious orthodoxy underlies the new-rightist vote. Support for freedom of speech proves relevant, but, in accordance with literature on the new right’s electoral strategy and with theorising on framing, this only leads towards the new right among those who are ethnocentric. These findings are discussed in the light of electoral competition, and questions for further research are formulated.     

Locke, Sincerity and the Rationality of Persecution

According to the most influential contemporary reading of John Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration (1689), his main argument against religious persecution is unsuccessful. That argument holds that coercion is ineffective as a means of instilling religious beliefs in its victims. I propose a different reading of the Letter . Locke's main consideration against persecution is not the unsuccessful belief-based argument just outlined, but what I call the sincerity argument . He believes that religious coercion is irrational because it is ineffective as a means of inculcating the right intentions in people. Once this alternative argument is placed at its centre, the Letter is seen to be a more fertile source of political argument than is suggested by alternative readings. In particular, the sincerity argument gives us a powerful reason for rejecting state moral paternalism, the doctrine that the state may use coercion to make people morally virtuous. If moral virtue depends upon people having the right intentions, and if coercion is ineffective as a means of instilling the right intentions in people, then state moral paternalism is ineffective and hence irrational.     

How has Radical Right Support Transformed Established Political Conflicts? The Case of Austria

In many European party systems, the radical right has challenged established patterns of political competition. This article studies the consequences of this by using the case of the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) and data from Austria’s first national election study (AUTNES). It is found that the FPÖ has weakened Austria’s previously highly stable system of socio-structural and ideological divisions as expressed by the two mainstream parties, the People’s Party and the Social Democrats. In socio-structural terms, the FPÖ has undermined the Social Democrats’ support base. In ideological terms, FPÖ voters have distinct views on newer issues such as immigration, European integration and dissatisfaction with the political system, but its supporters’ views on Austria’s traditional conflicts surrounding the economy and social and religious values cannot explain the party’s success. These findings further our understanding of the transformation of political conflicts not just in Austria, but in Western Europe in general.     

Solace for the Frustrations of Silent Citizenship: the Case of Epicureanism

Insofar as no democratic society can fully realize norms of free and equal citizenship, citizens in such regimes are likely to experience some degree of discontent with their political lives. This raises a second purpose for democratic theory beyond the usual focus on improving democratic institutions: the psychological issue of how ordinary citizens might find solace in the face of disappointment. Democratic theory is capable of providing solace because egalitarian commitments – equality, free speech, solidarity, and self-sufficiency – have a double potential: they not only ground efforts to democratize institutions, but when sublimated in apolitical form also have the capacity to generate a transcendence of the political form itself. In this essay, I pursue both ideas – the need for solace and egalitarianism's ability to provide it – through analysis of the way Epicureanism may have functioned for the ordinary, plebeian citizens in late Republican Rome.     

Government Has No “Religious Agency”: James Madison's Fundamental Principle of Religious Liberty

Religious liberty has reemerged as a problem in liberal democracy. For guidance we can turn to James Madison. Unfortunately, his fundamental principle of religious liberty has been misunderstood. Madison believed that power over religious conscience always remains with the individual, which means that government never has a power to attempt to cause or prohibit religious opinions or profession and only has the power to prohibit religious practices that are “adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.” Madison's fundamental principle of religious liberty is therefore that government has no “religious agency.” In matters of religious establishment, “no agency” means that government lacks even the power to cognize religious opinions or practices. But in matters of free exercise, “no agency” means that government can accommodate citizens’ religious consciences, even if that accommodation requires cognizing their religious opinions. An important but widely overlooked example of Madison's complex but principled approach to religious liberty is his 1790 proposal for a statutory exemption from federal militia service for religious objectors.     

Dutch 'Multiculturalism' Beyond the Pillarisation Myth

This article is about the state of multiculturalist politics in the Netherlands. It assesses the popular claim that a paradigmatic change has occurred in the Netherlands due to events such as 9/11 and the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh. The article argues that although changes are significant, both in discourse and in practice, they must be viewed as part of a process of rethinking the relation between newcomers and the state that goes back as far as the end of the 1980s. Long-standing claims about the exemplary form of multiculturalism in the Netherlands were always ambiguous at least, or even hard to sustain. The article criticises the persistent idea that Dutch accommodating integration policies since the end of the 1970s are an extension of the historical tradition of 'pillarisation'. Only by going beyond this myth can we understand why recent changes are much less of a break with the past, and why multiculturalism was never accepted or practised as fully as has often been suggested in more stereotypical depictions of Dutch integration policy.     

Recent Developments to British Multicultural Theory,Policy and Practice: The Case of British Muslims

Since the early 1970s, there have been highly sophisticated arguments and conceptual discussions put forward in relation to how Western liberal democracies might wish to manage their diverse ethnic minority populations. It is apparent, however, that in the current climate, the important principles of unity and diversity are insufficient to challenge differing forms of ethnic, racial, and religious inequality. This paper argues that because of its underlying assumptions and modus operandi in the post-September 11 climate, British multiculturalism has been ineffective, even supporting some commentators' suggestions of a return to assimilationism. There is a new era in post-September 11 political hegemony, economic determinism and structural and cultural racisms, with European government rhetoric and public policy almost exclusively aimed at Muslims—whether as existing citizens or as part of a process of limiting immigration (which has tended to be from mainly Eastern European, North African, and Middle Eastern sending regions and nations). The example of New Labour and how it has attempted to deal with multiculturalism in Britain is a case in point. The discussion explores the changing concept of multiculturalism with special reference to British Muslims and debates that emerge in relation to identity, nation and civil society. It is argued that the experience and treatment of British Muslims is important to explore and appreciate in the current climate as it provides a test case for the future of (a) British multiculturalism and (b) British Muslims in society per se.     

Multiculturalism in one country?

Abstract

This review is persuaded by Modood's account of what multiculturalism should look like in the early twenty-first century underpinned as it is by well-made critiques of liberalism and radical secularism. But is far less convinced that Modood has successfully charted a strategy that will achieve his desired outcome of a flexible process of integration and a Britishness to which all can belong.     

Exemplary Lives and the Normative Theory of Culture

This article defends an essentialist account of culture against the recent turn toward nonessentialism in contemporary liberal multiculturalism. It does so by drawing on Friedrich Nietzsche's early period and argues that Nietzsche provides an alternative to the dominant tradition of Volk conceptions of culture that derive from J. G. Herder. Nietzsche's alternative—what I call the “Exemplar Account” of culture—defines culture in terms of the patterns of human excellence that constitute it. This alternative overcomes standard concerns about essentialism by embracing the nonessentialist insight into the fluidity and variability of any culture's beliefs, values, and practices, yet holds that exemplary lives transcend the flux of culture and individuate one culture from another. I suggest in conclusion a practical benefit of this conception of culture for contemporary multiculturalism—namely, it fares better than other conceptions in fostering integration among diverse cultures, a pressing worry facing the current project of multiculturalism.     

Free Speech and Learning from Difference

In debates about campus speech, there are arguments from the left and from the right that the community function of a college and the intellectual functions of a college can’t both be maximized. Improving the community role necessarily entails placing limits on the intellectual roles, and improving the intellectual role necessarily entails placing limits on the community roles. Where these arguments disagree is in the valuation of the tradeoffs between these roles. I argue that the apparent tension between the community role and intellectual role of colleges can be resolved, or at least mitigated, if we make a clearer distinction between speech and community endorsement of speech. What’s more, if we understand speech to be exploratory in nature rather than declaratory, we may remove some of the status competition between different groups that characterizes the dispute. This can allow for potential complementarities to emerge from the community support role of a college and the intellectual role. The core idea that I wish to explore is the notion of discovery that is embedded in Mill’s defense of free speech and in his conception of experiments in living. This approach depends on the idea that we can abandon the goal of defeating our opponents, and instead embrace the goal of accommodating one another.     

Race Equality after Enoch Powell

Enoch Powell's infamous speech casts a long shadow over race equality in the UK. Looking back to the 1968 Race Relations Bill and then forwards to the present social and political landscape this article explores how an uneven race equality story has been characteristic of the UK approach since Powell's intervention. If the intended objective of the initial and later race equality bills was to reduce ethnic and racial disparities to a marginal or ‘negligible’ level, then we are a great distance from success. If the objective was slightly different, but not unrelated, and sought to reshape public conventions on racism (and ethnic and racial diversity more broadly), then the answer is more complicated but also unfinished.     

Global equality of opportunity and self-determination in the context of immigration

David Miller’s political philosophy of immigration employs two complementary argumentative strategies to challenge open border theories. The first strategy is to defeat the principled case for open borders, such as the global equality of opportunity argument for more lax immigration control. The second strategy is to establish the democratic community’s prima facie right to determine the shape of its future, including membership and the right to exclude. First, I argue that Miller’s conception of global equality of opportunity is overly narrow and that his objections to the principle, to the metric and to what counts as feasible political action misfire against other, more plausible, accounts. Second, I argue that his democratic interpretation of collective self-determination does not solve the pressing question concerning the morally justified scope and content of self-determination and the moral limits of the right to exclude. I conclude by questioning Miller’s general strategy: whether theories of immigration should be engaged in an exercise of shifting the burden of proof between open and closed borders. By contrast, I argue that a more desirable task for the political philosophy of immigration is to find ways in which the joint requirement of global equality of opportunity and collective self-determination can be coherently upheld.     

The logic of multiculturalism and Korean democracy

In this article, I attempt to construct a normative framework of Korean multiculturalism in the Confucian public-societal context of Korean democracy by focusing on the political implications of the claim to cultural rights (so-called ‘logic’ of multiculturalism) and cultural pluralism that it is likely to entail for Korean democracy. After examining the logic of multiculturalism that often puts multiculturalism in tension with liberal democracy, I turn to Will Kymlicka's account of immigrant multiculturalism that resolves the potential tension between multiculturalism and liberal democracy in a liberal way. Then, I construct a normative framework of Korean multiculturalism in a way that a decent multicultural society can be established on the same public-cultural ground on which Korean democracy has matured in the past two decades.     

‘Strangers in their own land’: Powellism’s policy impact

ABSTRACT

In this paper, Solomos provides an account of the impact of Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech on policy agendas about race relations and immigration. He argues that Powell’s intervention helped to shape policy frames around race and immigration in its immediate aftermath and beyond. By exploring the impact of the speech on the policy climate, his paper argues that perhaps the most important aspect of the speech is the way it helped to shape the policy agendas of both the Conservative and Labour parties, even as Powell himself was marginalized from mainstream politics. He concludes by suggesting that Powell’s intervention links up with contemporary debates and preoccupations about race and immigration.