The magic kingdom syndrome: trials and tribulations of life in Disney’s celebration

This paper critically analyzes the political elements of the new town planning trend, New Urbanism, through a study of the Disney Company’s development of Celebration, Florida. Celebration, as both a high‐profile example of the New Urbanism and as a product of Disney’s skill at “Imagineering,” provides an important example of utopian thinking and planning within the context of the political economy of consumption. Through interviews and archival research, this paper looks at the political and social implications of commodity utopianism as planned communities and the ethic of consumption continue to occupy prominent places within the popular American psyche.     

Ireland: From modest beginnings to a big player

From modest beginnings as an agrarian country, Ireland now has one of the highest growth rates in the world as a result of its sound economic policies, innovation, and the deliberate internatioalisation of its economy.     

Towards a multi‐party Britain?

This article examines the rise of the minor parties since 1973. Some of the causes of this increase were common to all the minor parties in Great Britain, others peculiar to particular parties. The scope for a rise in the support of minor parties is greater than is often supposed but they face special problems in mobilising this potential. Since 1974 their support has fallen, but the nineteen‐eighties are likely to see intermittent increases in their vote; unless there are major institutional changes however, the two party system is likely to survive albeit in a modified form.     

Natural Intellectual Property Rights and the Public Domain

No natural rights theory justifies strong intellectual property rights. More specifically, no theory within the entire domain of natural rights thinking – encompassing classical liberalism, libertarianism and left‐libertarianism, in all their innumerable variants – coherently supports strengthening current intellectual property rights. Despite their many important differences, all these natural rights theories endorse some set of members of a common family of basic ethical precepts. These commitments include non‐interference, fairness, non‐worsening, consistency, universalisability, prior consent, self‐ownership, self‐governance, and the establishment of zones of autonomy. Such commitments have clear applications pertaining to the use and ownership of created ideas. I argue that each of these commitments require intellectual property rights to be substantially limited in scope, strength and duration. In this way the core mechanisms of natural rights thinking ensure a robust public domain and categorically rule out strong intellectual property rights.     

The Shift from Agonistic to Non-Agonistic Debate in Early Nyāya

This article examines the emergence of the Nyāya distinction between vāda and jalpa as didactic-scientific and agonistic-sophistical forms of debate, respectively. Looking at the relevant sutras in Gautama’s Nyāya-sūtra (NS 1.2.1-3) in light of the earlier discussion of the types of debate in Caraka Saṃhitā 8, the article argues that certain ambiguities and obscurities in the former text can be explained on the hypothesis that the early Nyāya presupposed an agonistic understanding of vāda similar to what we find in Caraka.     

Intergenerational Justice and the Non-reciprocity Problem

Many of us share a strong intuitive sense that acts or policies that gravely threaten future people's well-being violate the requirements of justice. This intuition has proven problematic for theories that found justice on reciprocity because future people are viewed as powerless to reciprocate our actions towards them. The non-reciprocity problem appears to deliver a decisive blow to reciprocity-based theories of justice. I wish to dispute this view. I point to two well-known facts about human existence – generations overlap continuously and the old depend upon the young – to show that future generations are not asymmetrically vulnerable to our actions, and therefore that justice as reciprocity is not vulnerable to the non-reciprocity problem.