Why Subjectivity Matters: Critical Theory and the Philosophy of the Subject

Abstract

In this paper it is argued that Habermas' critique of German Idealism is misguided and that his rejection of the philosophy of the subject is unjustified. Critical Theory needs to recognise the importance of subjectivity for all social philosophy if its theoretical aims are to be achieved. In order to demonstrate the relevance of subjectivity to Critical Theory the essay draws on analytic philosophy of mind and on the work of Manfred Frank and Dieter Henrich.     

Models of Executive Politics: a Framework for the Study of Executive Power Relations in Parliamentary and Semi–presidential Regimes

The study of executives politics has been characterized by dichotomous country–specific debates about whether there is, for example, prime ministerial or cabinet government. Recent work has established new terms for these debates leading to more pluralistic conceptualizations of executive politics. Nevertheless, this work has not created the conditions for rigorous cross-national comparison. This article establishes a framework to compare executive branch power relations. It identifies six models of executive politics comprising a comprehensive set of ways in which power may be distributed amongst chief executives, cabinets, ministers and bureaucrats. On the basis of this framework it is argued that it is necessary to engage in empirical observation to determine which models of government occur and to identify the reasons why these models emerge.     

Exchange, unanimity and consent: a defence of the public choice account of power

An enduring criticism of public choice theory is that it does not adequately address the question of power in contemporary capitalist societies. In particular it is argued that the exchange paradigm and the principle of unanimity lead to a conservative defence of the unequal and unjust status quo of such societies. These criticisms are often presented as unanswered and unanswerable. Indeed, public choice scholars have tended to pursue their own research agendas rather than engage such criticisms. This article seeks to make good this lacuna by providing a defence of the public choice account of power. It is shown that within the public choice approach the exchange paradigm and the unanimity principle serve as idealized models against which to judge real world institutional arrangements. As such, these models serve as a basis for critique of contemporary capitalist societies in which all individuals may be subject to predation as a matter of routine. It is shown that the public choice account of power addresses the legitimization and limitation of power, whereas the critics of public choice in effect propose to allocate power to those deemed deserving. Hence, the public choice approach provides a basis for a genuinely consensual politics and exposes the fact that alternative conceptions of politics are fundamentally non-consensual. On this basis it is concluded that the public choice account of power in contemporary capitalist societies is superior to that offered by its critics.     

The Technology Trap and the Role of Political and Cultural Variables: A Critical Analysis of the E‐Government Policies

More than a decade after the first introduction of the e‐government policies, early enthusiasms on its immediate benefits on the quality of democracy have undergone critical review. E‐government implementation worldwide has proved that technology alone does not necessarily provide more access and more participation. Massive technological intervention is not enough for reinventing government online. Hence, other variables should be taken into consideration. Factors concerning political culture, cognitive frames and mentality, administrative traditions, as well as the country‐specific peculiarities play a relevant role in determining if and how e‐gov initiatives can succeed or fail. In this article, it will be argued that any opportunity and push for change and actual influence on administrations, governments, and societies, prompted by the new technologies, should endure important variables of political, social, and cultural nature. The political and socio‐cultural variables then overcome the technological one and we can state that politics (still) determines (e‐)policy.     

The Continuity of Change: Public Budgeting and Finance Reforms over 70 Years

Fiscal management in the national government remains just as important to public administration in 2007 as it was in 1937. Arthur E. Buck and Harvey C. Mansfield's critique of the fragmentation among congressional, bureaucratic, and presidential interests in budgeting and accountability is a classic for those who argue for stronger presidential power and capacity within American government. This analysis draws the field's attention to what we can learn about the politics of management reform from the successes and limitations of this landmark study—lessons that will serve the field well as it confronts new issues and reform agendas in the future.     

Shadow boxing in family politics: reply to Martin Durham

In his writings on government foucault commonly uses term ‘political’ as if it were equivalant to a certain understanding of governmental. Thus, in the title of his cotribution to the Tanner Lectures on Human Values, ‘Omnes et Singulatim, towards a criticism of ”political reason“, the object of Foucault's usage of the term ‘political’ to refer to a kind of govrmetal reason. Second, I argue that the practice of what Foucault understands by political reason in fact creates coditions for the emergence of a politics and a political reason of a very different kind. The appearance of this latter political reason poses a range of problems which must be addressed by any political (in the sense of governmental) reason but which play little part in Foucault's discussion. It Suggests, in particular, that Foucault's account of the liberal rationality of government is seriously incomplete. Third, I consider the grounds for Foucault's counterposition of political reason to liberation, noting that his critique of political reason as a principle of subjectivation raises a more general issue, which he describes as ‘the politics of ourselves’ (Foucault 1993: 223). I conclude by noting that Foucault's discussions of political reason lead in two very different directions: towards a powerful analysis of the practices and rationalities of government in the modern West or towards a radical critique of most forms of government, including the modern government of oneself.     

How and when do presidents influence the duration of coalition bargaining in semi‐presidential systems?

How and when do presidents influence the government formation process in semi‐presidential systems? Presidents have both a formal role and vested interest in the formation of the cabinet, yet their influence has been overlooked in studies of the duration of government formation. In this article, it is argued that the president's influence over government formation can be explained by his or her perceived legitimacy to act in the bargaining process and their partisanship. In this first case, it is argued that the legitimacy to act derives from a president's constitutional powers and more powerful presidents simplify cabinet bargaining, leading to shorter government formation periods. In the second case, it is proposed that presidents and their parties have overlapping preferences. Therefore, when the president's party holds greater bargaining power in government formation negotiations, the bargaining process is less uncertain and less complex. Thus, government formation processes will be shorter. Using survival models and data from 26 European democracies, both propositions are confirmed by the analysis. The results enhance our understanding of the dynamics of cabinet bargaining processes and contribute to the wider study of semi‐presidentialism and executive‐legislative relations. One broader implication of these results is that the president's party affiliation is an important motivation for them as political actors; this contrasts with some previous studies which conceive of presidents as non‐partisan actors.     

Critique of Marx's 1857 Introduction

A group of leading critical writers in the school of govenrmentality studies have recently called for a debate over the methoddological and political direction of studies of complex mode of government beyond confines of the State. This paper traces the divisions within the field to Foucault's ambiguous methodological legacy, in paraticular to an impoverished theorization of sovereignty. Rather, this paper emphasizes its centripetal function, within and between nation states, in maintaining hybrid forms of liberal rule in the effort to manage the centrifugal tendencies endemic in a pluralist liberal order. These modes of rule operate in tension with the role of liberalism as critique. On the basis of this analysis, it is argued that radical critique within this field is limited, erroneuously distances critique from liberlism and would be unduly restrictive for governmentality theorists who with to perform a more central role as public intellectuals. Liberalism could once more be the principal focus for a normatively comitted form governmentality studies, which in turn, could emerge as its principal vehicla for immanent critque and renewal.     

Better the Devil: A Response to Gus O'Donnell's ‘Better Government’

Gus O'Donnell's vision of ‘better government’ is presented as a critique of party politics, most specifically the short‐termism, selfishness and incompetence of elected politicians. There are few people better placed than O'Donnell to form such judgements. However, O'Donnell goes much further, by calling into question the legitimacy of the democratic system which gives rise to party politics. His article outlines several mechanisms by which the exercise of power by elected ministers could be constrained by a managerialist accountability framework, without addressing the question of who determines the appropriate framework for ministerial performance. The House of Commons is condemned as ‘too politicised’. O'Donnell also offers substantial praise for apparently ‘depoliticised’ policy‐making processes, overlooking the inherently political constitution of such processes. In doing so, O'Donnell claims to be challenging party politics on behalf of voters/taxpayers, but instead seeks to dismantle any possibility of the public expressing a collective will via the ballot box that might challenge the immutability of the market economy.     

Between Speech and Silence: The Postcolonial Critic and the Idea of Emancipation

Abstract

The concept of emancipation has an increasingly ambivalent status in postcolonial criticism. Under the influence of poststructuralism, the idea that the subaltern subject might overcome colonial relations of cultural domination through acts of self-representation has been thrown into disrepute. If there is to be emancipation, according to this view, it will not come through the recovery of an authentic speaking subject, but through strategies of ‘strategic essentialism’. Here it is argued that this postructuralist approach leaves the subaltern in a politically pre carious position and should be exchanged for the kind of hermeneutic approach that makes possible a genuine politics of recognition.     

Adorno,Gastronomic Authenticity,and the Politics of Eating Well

Recent trends like locavorism, green consumerism, and ethical consumption point to a new politics of eating, what is called in this article the new gastronomy, which centers on buying locally, humanely, and sustainably produced foods. However, rather than exemplifying a novel and contemporary turn in food politics, it is argued that the new gastronomy's faith in buying local is linked to an ancient politics of consumption that can be traced back to the Greeks and is grounded in virtue and temperance; and, furthermore, that this is most evident in the new gastronomy's emphasis on the humane treatment of animals. Additionally, the new gastronomy's claim of authenticity with regard to production, distribution, and consumption (for example, artisan, farm to table, etc.) works to veil this traditional politics of eating, lending its supporters a false sense of political progressivism or radicalism. Working from Theodor Adorno's analysis in The Jargon of Authenticity, it is demonstrated that what the local foods movement really offers is a jargon of gastronomic authenticity that claims self-transparency of action and provides a superficial escape from the exploitative reality of late capitalism. Finally, Adorno's critique of ideology and authenticity and his special attention to animals in his work are presented as potential disrupters of bourgeois identity and as a way to strip the ideological surface of this new gastronomy to reveal its complicity with exploitative systems of food production and distribution.     

The Level of Democratization Related to Socioeconomic Variables in 147 States in 1980-85

It is argued in this article that democratization is causally related to socioeconomic variables indicating the distribution of economic and intellectual power resources among competing groups. This assumption has been deduced from an evolutionary theory of politics, according to which politics is principally a struggle for scarce resources. Consequently, democracy is assumed to emerge in conditions in which power resources have become so widely distributed that no group is any longer able to suppress its competitors or to maintain its hegemony. Empirical variables were formulated to measure hypothetical concepts 'democracy' and 'power resources'. The hypothesis is tested by empirical data covering 147 states of the period 1980–85. The results of correlation analysis show that the principal explanatory factor, the Index of Power Resources, statistically explains about 70 percent of the variation in the Index of Democratization. Regression analysis is used to disclose how well the general relationship applies to single countries and which countries deviate from the general pattern. High negative residuals are interpreted to mean that the level of democratization should be much higher than it actually is, and high positive residuals can be interpreted to mean that the level of democratization is much higher than expected on the basis of the country's social conditions.     

Authority and the study of French politics: A response to Duclaud‐Williams

This article reconsiders the value of French authority attitudes for the understanding of French politics in the light of Duclaud‐Williams’ recent critique of the works of Michel Crozier. It is argued that the criticisms made by Duclaud‐Williams do not amount to a refutation of Crozier's thesis or of the type of approach it represents, and that advances in this area are more likely to come from further attempts at identifying empirically the nature and role of French authority norms, such as that of Schonfeld, which is discussed and evaluated here.     

Madison on the Meaning of the "General Welfare," the "Purpose" of Enumerated Powers, and the "Definition" of Constitutional Government

According to James Madison, "the most important and fundamentalquestion" he ever addressed was the meaning of and relationbetween the general welfare clause and the enumeration of particularpowers. This question is the most "fundamental" because theanswer determines the very "idea" or "nature" of the U.S. Constitution.Commentators virtually agree on the answer Madison proposedand defended in Federalist 41, namely, that the general welfareclause is neither a statement of ends nor a substantive grantof power. It is a mere "synonym" for the enumeration of particularpowers, which are limited and wholly define its content. Fromthis answer, it follows that the primary meaning of the nationaldimension of the federal Constitution is limited government,understood as a government with a limited number of powers ormeans. The thesis of this essay, however, is that, contraryto the commentators' claims, Madison argued that the clausewas a substantive grant of power for the generally stated endand that the primary purpose of the ensuing enumeration wasto define more particularly the ends alluded to by the phrase"general welfare." Hence, the meaning of the general constitutionalgovernment in the American federal system is a government orientedto a limited number of limited ends.     

Trajectories of Arts and Culture Policy in New Zealand

This article examines how arts and culture policy has been discussed since the 1960s in New Zealand, showing how it has increasingly been coupled with the construction of national identity. It also suggests that the rhetoric of the current Labour government marks a significant change. Against the traditional understanding of arts and culture as public and cultural goods, whose vital ‐ if intangible ‐ benefits justify the inevitable economic cost, since 1999 they have been fundamentally re‐imagined as contributing to a cohesive society ‐ through the fostering of “national identity” ‐ and also to a dynamic economy ‐ through the creation of jobs. This change is seen as an element of “third‐way” politics, and is argued to limit dangerously the sort of art that can be funded and valued.     

After representation: recent discussions of the relation between language and literature

It is argued that contemporary discussions of literary representation - organized around the category of experience and its structuralist critique - are misleading. First, it is shown that although literary experience does not provide a foundation for representation, such experience is, nonetherless, not merely a chimera projected from an unacknowledged ‘grammar’. Second,it is shown that literary representations have conditions of possibility which are not reducible to language as it is conceived in structuralist theory.In conclusion, it is argued that if literary representation has no single foundation in experience or in language, then general theories of representation must give way to a more piecemeal ‘rhetoric’of literary capacities.     

Enslaved by one's body? Gender,citizenship and the ‘wrong body’ narrative

This paper uses the concepts of slavery, citizenship, the body and political subjectivity to interrogate how gendered bodies are produced, regulated and normalised. It explores the ‘wrong body’ claim within transsexual narratives to analyse how we can be enslaved by/to our body. The coercive force of embodied existence is demonstrated by examining how gender norms act on us through our bodies, thus identifying the body as a major conduit of power. It argues that the ‘wrong body’ claim must be understood as a discursive construction that is rendered possible by established gender norms and practices, which place heavy restrictions on the available actions of individuals. These norms and practices are linked to the normalising processes of becoming an acceptable citizen. It is argued that the enslaving effects of embodiment can be mitigated through constructing alternative narratives of gender based upon performativity and fluidity. Such alternative gender narratives are used to contest and disrupt the meaning of the acceptable citizen, thus opening up new claims for citizenship and new forms of embodied subjectivity. These narratives are then used to critique the medical community's understanding and treatment of transsexuality, which is itself a site of coercion and normalisation.     

Political power and political subsystems: Parsons' analysis of politics

In the field of sociological analyses of politics and power Parsons' contribution has tended to be dismissed abruptly as the ultimate expression of ‘consensus’ theory, and has been accused of denying the existence of social tensions and social change. This paper argues that this tendency is quite inadequate, indeed erroneous, and proposes a distinct mode of critique of Parsons' theory of politics and power. On the basis of an outline of the major concepts of this theory, the concepts of functional subsystems, system-goals and structural differentiation, it shows that Parsons has produced a distinct but nevertheless theoretically problematic framework for socio-political analysis. His concept of system-interchange is shown to be based on a contradictory treatment of subsystems and human subjects, and his outline of structural differentiation is shown to produce a theoretical teleology.     

Objectification and the contraditions of bourgeois power: Sartre and the modern prison

The state, it is often and correctly said, is a social relation. The apparatuses of the state are not simply instruments for the use of one class or another, not just techniques of domination, but are themselves embodiments of bourgeois power relations. Thus the modern prison, for example, is bourgeois, not because of its uses or control, but in the very organisation of power that pervades it. Uncovering the bourgeois character of this power relation through an examination of Bentham's model prison, the Panopticon, is one task of this paper. Sartre's critique of objectification appears as a critique of the tyranny of society in general, and this is the way in which Sartre himself sees it. However, its real object of analysis is precisely the power relations of bourgeois society. Sartre's genius lies in the clarity of his perception of the contradictions inherent in these relations; his failure lay in his inability to see their historical character. As a result, his critical humanism reflects, but never gets beneath the surface of these contradictions. Separating the rational kernel from the mystical shell of Sartre's critique is the route taken here toward an understanding of bourgeois power.     

Politics like any other? Comparative politics,international relations and the study of the EU

This article disputes the claim made by Simon Hix (WEP January 1994) that ‘politics in the EC is not inherently different to the practice of government in any democratic system’ and argues against a rigid division between international relations and comparative politics. It contends first, that EU politics cannot be broken up into two categories: ‘politics’ and ‘integration'; second, that the nature of the EU system, the centrality of states and the continued importance of power considerations precludes explanations of EU ‘politics’ through the use of comparative government approaches alone; and third, that public policy cannot in general be studied without reference to international factors.