Law And Sovereignty

How is it possible that the idea of sovereignty still features in legal and political philosophy? Most contemporary political philosophers have little use for the idea of ‘unlimited’ or ‘absolute’ power, which is how sovereignty is normally defined. A closer look at sovereignty identifies two possible accounts: sovereignty as the fact of power or sovereignty as a title to govern. The first option, which was pursued by John Austin’s command theory of law, leads to an unfamiliar view of law and the state, which was justly criticised by H. L. A. Hart. The second option, leads to a paradox, because under this view sovereignty is both limited and unlimited. Hence, this argument shows that law and sovereignty are actually incompatible. Where there is law there is no sovereignty, and where there is sovereignty there is no law.     

Legal Judgment as Self-Mastery

Many legal theorists see legal judgment as a largely professional or technical task. This is not how law sees itself. When looked at from the perspective of the engaged judge, law requires from us that we arrive at a certain internal governance of our thoughts and emotions. Legal scholarship and legal procedure tell us that law creates true reasons that override other, personal, reasons, even those of the utmost importance to us. A philosophical understanding of law requires a distinct argument that explains how such overriding reasons can be associated with the law and how there can be a personal duty to adapt our reasoning when we make authoritative legal judgments in order to change the lives of others. The philosophy of law needs to explain how legal judgment can be a form of self-mastery.     

Climbing to the Rooftop,Falling off,yet Landing on One’s Feet (and Finding a Wallet on the Pavement?): The Electoral Fate of the Greek Ecogreens (2004–15)

After a prolonged period of feeble electoral success, the Ecologists Greens (Ecogreens) managed to break into the Greek political landscape by electing one MEP in the 2009 European election. However, that electoral success proved to be quite short-lived, since in the years to follow the Greek Greens faded away. They were divided and faced the threat of political extinction, only to be resuscitated at the national election of 2015 by allying themselves with the winning leftist Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA). This article draws on archival and survey data to recount the electoral fate of the Ecologists Greens from their creation to their current place in the Greek parliament and government.     

How terrorism affects political attitudes: France in the aftermath of the 2015–2016 attacks

This study investigates what impact the terrorist attacks in Paris (2015) and Nice (2016) had on political attitudes in France. Drawing on nine cross-sectional surveys, it tests the premises of three major theories of opinion change that predict contrasting shifts in opinion among ordinary citizens according to their ideological position in the aftermath of terrorist attacks: the Reactive Liberals Hypothesis (RLH), the Terror Management Theory (TMT), and the Bayesian Updating Theory (BUT). In line with both RLH and BUT, the findings show that left-wing sympathisers shifted toward the right following the attacks. However, the results suggest that, in line with BUT, the attacks only had a significant impact on attitudes toward security, while they had no effect on attitudes toward immigration, or toward moral and socio-economic issues.