Dispositional neutrality and minority rights

Alan Patten defends a novel principle of neutrality according to which the state must accommodate all conceptions of the good equally. This principle rests on the claim that the state must be equally responsive to the interests of all citizens. I introduce a competing principle – neutrality of disposition – according to which the state must be disposed to treat citizens with different conceptions of the good alike in relevantly similar situations. The requirement of the equal responsiveness of the state is neutral between these two conceptions of neutrality. Moreover, neutrality of disposition, unlike neutrality of treatment, is compatible with a plausible luck egalitarian view of cultural justice according to which justice requires the state to be more accommodating of some conceptions of the good than of others in situations where not being so will result in members of minority cultures being worse off than others through no responsibility of their own.     

Alan Patten’s theory of equal recognition and its contribution to the debate over multiculturalism

In this introduction, we first give a brief overview of the debate over multiculturalism in political theory. We then situate Alan Patten’s Equal Recognition in that context by highlighting his major normative thesis, according to which there are reasons of principle, in a liberal democracy, to grant special forms of public recognition and accommodation to cultural minorities. Finally, we present a succinct summary of the nine articles that follow this introduction and that critically engage with Patten’s arguments.     

有限政府理论的现代解读

霍布斯、斯宾诺莎为有限政府理论的形成奠定了必要的思想基础。有限政府理论的核心要素第一次被提炼为一套一致的知识传统,并通过一个强有力的政治运动表达出来,是英国内战期间以及光荣革命之后的辉格党人执政期间,其重要的代表作是洛克的《政府论》。洛克的自然权利理论、社会契约理论和分权制衡理论构成了有限政府理论的核心。孟德斯鸠、休谟、卢梭等人对有限政府理论的发展都做过贡献。有限政府理论曾一度衰落,但二战后,有限政府理论开始复兴,重要代表人物有哈耶克、布坎南等,重要代表理论有公共选择理论、政府有限能力理论等。     

个人自主:自由主义的核心价值

自由主义的根本精神是个人主义,个人主义的根本含义是对个人自主能力的尊重。自由主义以个人自主为其目的价值,其他基本价值包括多元主义、宽容、自由、正义、平等等皆以这一目的价值为根据。个人自主以消极自由和积极自由为其必要条件。仅仅强调消极自由会纵容盲目、非理性的个人行为,而仅仅强调积极自由则会走向专制主义。反自由主义者们往往在批评以至抨击过度的消极自由现实时,走向反个人主义的积极自由所必然演绎的专制主义。只有把消极自由与包含个人自主的积极自由相结合,才能克服上述两个极端。     

对现代法治的反思——评R.M.昂格尔《现代社会中的法律》

对现代法治的核心理念及其不可实现性的剖析是《现代社会中的法律》一书中最有价值的部分.昂格尔从一种新的视角出发阐释了法治产生的原因,指出了自由主义社会中法治的内在矛盾,以及在后自由主义社会福利国家和合作主义给法治带来的根本性挑战.这一对现代法治的深刻反思虽然被认为夸大了法治自身所存在的和面临的问题,但是对我们深入地理解法治、有效地进行法治建设具有重要的理论价值.     

Diversity,federalism and the nineteenth-century liberals

This paper provides an argument in favour of federal institutional design on the basis that it is more congenial to the preservation and promotion of normatively desirable societal diversity than its unitary alternative. Seeking inspiration in the work of three of the most influential liberal thinkers of the nineteenth century: John Stuart Mill; Alexis de Tocqueville; and Lord Acton, I construct a novel case for federalism that focuses on the inherent benefits of a dual/multi-layered governmental structure. Section one argues for the value of diversity, stating that it can both improve the authenticity of individually exercised autonomy, and improve the quality of individually espoused moral views. Section two considers the potential dangers posed by the unitary state to the flourishing of diversity through the centralisation of key institutions. Section three shows how the federal model sidesteps these pitfalls, and offers a more auspicious environment for the cultivation and enjoyment of diversity.     

The Pancasila Delusion

Rather than producing a new liberal democracy, Indonesia’s sudden democratising process that started in 1998 has produced a mere electoral democracy. This commentary argues that this situation cannot be separated from the preservation of the Five Principles, or the Pancasila, in the political reform agenda (reformasi). In this case, the Indonesian version of exceptionalism (national self-righteousness) has unwittingly legitimised some fundamental deviations from internationally well-established practices in global constitutionalism as the post Suharto Indonesia proceeds to “electoralise” its public life. Indonesia’s version of exceptionalism might best be described in an unabated conviction about the inviolable nature of Pancasila in national political life and beyond. This Pancasila delusion has gone further with the introduction of some legal efforts to prosecute any sacrileges against it. To make matters worse, this delusional conviction in Pancasila has stubbornly featured in Indonesia’s political thinking, which eventually has also prompted the process of reformasi to drift from one ad hoc response to another.     

Liberalism and geopolitics in EU–Russia relations: rereading the “Baltic factor”

Contrary to some expectations, the Baltic states’ accession to the EU in 2004 was not followed by an improvement in their relations with Russia. Instead, the Baltic states became known as the “troublemakers” of EU–Russia relations. This was commonly explained by their history and national identity, which contributed to an understanding of the Baltic concerns as marginal. The Ukraine crisis brought a reaction of “I told you so” by the Baltic states that for many years had been warning the West about Russia’s expansionist ambitions. This article explores the ideational underpinnings of the gap between the Baltic states’ perceptions of and relations with Russia on the one hand and mainstream views in Europe on the other. It identifies liberal interdependence, democratic peace, and realist geopolitics as key ideas that have framed the EU’s and Baltic states’ perceptions of Russia. In the vein of constructivist foreign policy analysis, these ideational structures are seen to condition the EU’s and Baltic states’ interests and policies vis-à-vis Russia. An analysis of the “Baltic factor” helps to illuminate the contradictions and shortcomings in the EU’s Russia policy and review its ideational basis which is now in need of a strategic rethink.     

The role of journalists’ questions in campaign forums

This article examines the role of journalists’ questions in campaign agenda‐setting, through an analysis of questions and answers from the 1984 campaign forums. The intention is to identify more fully the conditions and techniques in operation as the agenda is being composed and to illuminate ways in which questioners and candidates vie for dominance.

While the audience may see panel members as uninhibited inquisitors, the setting and context of forums circumscribe panelists’ actions and exert a moderating effect. Panel members are screened and can be vetoed by candidates, and they are bound by demands of television, concerned about embarrassment, reluctant to antagonize candidates, and influenced by the existing campaign agenda. They have influence in introducing topics and guiding discussion, but their questions can be disarmed or neutralized by an array of devices. To the extent that the forums contribute to the public agenda, the power to shape the contribution rests primarily with candidates and secondarily with questioners.     

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.