Iris Marion Young
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195392388
- eISBN:
- 9780199866625
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392388.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy
When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of “one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century” (Cass ...
More
When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of “one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century” (Cass Sunstein) and as an important and innovative thinker working at the conjunction of a number of important topics: global justice; democracy and difference; continental political theory; ethics and international affairs; and gender, race and public policy. This book discusses our responsibilities to address “structural” injustices in which we among many are implicated (but for which we are not to blame), often by virtue of participating in a market, such as buying goods produced in sweatshops, or participating in booming housing markets that leave many homeless. The book argues that addressing these structural injustices requires a new model of responsibility, which it calls the “social connection” model. The book develops this idea by clarifying the nature of structural injustice; developing the notion of political responsibility for injustice and how it differs from older ideas of blame and guilt; and finally how we can then use this model to describe our responsibilities to others no matter who we are and where we live.Less
When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of “one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century” (Cass Sunstein) and as an important and innovative thinker working at the conjunction of a number of important topics: global justice; democracy and difference; continental political theory; ethics and international affairs; and gender, race and public policy. This book discusses our responsibilities to address “structural” injustices in which we among many are implicated (but for which we are not to blame), often by virtue of participating in a market, such as buying goods produced in sweatshops, or participating in booming housing markets that leave many homeless. The book argues that addressing these structural injustices requires a new model of responsibility, which it calls the “social connection” model. The book develops this idea by clarifying the nature of structural injustice; developing the notion of political responsibility for injustice and how it differs from older ideas of blame and guilt; and finally how we can then use this model to describe our responsibilities to others no matter who we are and where we live.
Christopher Lake
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199241743
- eISBN:
- 9780191599743
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199241740.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Ch. 3 moves on from the question of why responsibility matters to that of what we are responsible for. It asks what a political, rather than a metaphysical, account of responsibility demands in terms ...
More
Ch. 3 moves on from the question of why responsibility matters to that of what we are responsible for. It asks what a political, rather than a metaphysical, account of responsibility demands in terms of its preconditions and assesses attributions of responsibility on the basis of claims about volition and affirmation. From there, it moves on to examine claims about responsibility, as these are made in the context of principles of equal opportunity.Less
Ch. 3 moves on from the question of why responsibility matters to that of what we are responsible for. It asks what a political, rather than a metaphysical, account of responsibility demands in terms of its preconditions and assesses attributions of responsibility on the basis of claims about volition and affirmation. From there, it moves on to examine claims about responsibility, as these are made in the context of principles of equal opportunity.
Iris Marion Young
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195392388
- eISBN:
- 9780199866625
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392388.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy
This chapter explicates the distinction between guilt and responsibility as it appears in Hannah Arendt's essays, “Organized Guilt and Universal Responsibility” and “Collective Responsibility.” It ...
More
This chapter explicates the distinction between guilt and responsibility as it appears in Hannah Arendt's essays, “Organized Guilt and Universal Responsibility” and “Collective Responsibility.” It then supplements this interpretation with a reading of her book Eichmann in Jerusalem, specifically from the point of view of the distinction between guilt and responsibility. It argues that the detailed analysis that Arendt makes of the actions of many individuals and groups during the time of the Nazi mass murder of Jews belies the simplicity of that idea. Out of a reading of Eichmann, the chapter distinguishes four ways that agents related to these state-perpetrated crimes. Out of these distinctions a notion of political responsibility is derived as a duty for individuals to take public stands about actions and events that affect broad masses of people, and to try to organize collective action to prevent massive harm or foster institutional change for the better. The distinction between responsibility in this sense, and concepts associated with guilt, blame, and fault is important for political theory and practice.Less
This chapter explicates the distinction between guilt and responsibility as it appears in Hannah Arendt's essays, “Organized Guilt and Universal Responsibility” and “Collective Responsibility.” It then supplements this interpretation with a reading of her book Eichmann in Jerusalem, specifically from the point of view of the distinction between guilt and responsibility. It argues that the detailed analysis that Arendt makes of the actions of many individuals and groups during the time of the Nazi mass murder of Jews belies the simplicity of that idea. Out of a reading of Eichmann, the chapter distinguishes four ways that agents related to these state-perpetrated crimes. Out of these distinctions a notion of political responsibility is derived as a duty for individuals to take public stands about actions and events that affect broad masses of people, and to try to organize collective action to prevent massive harm or foster institutional change for the better. The distinction between responsibility in this sense, and concepts associated with guilt, blame, and fault is important for political theory and practice.
JULIUS RUIZ
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199281831
- eISBN:
- 9780191712999
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199281831.003.0005
- Subject:
- History, European Modern History
This chapter analyses the implementation of the Law of Political Responsibilities (LPR), the repressive jurisdiction that attempted to wrest economic compensation from those considered guilty of ...
More
This chapter analyses the implementation of the Law of Political Responsibilities (LPR), the repressive jurisdiction that attempted to wrest economic compensation from those considered guilty of causing the prolonged civil war. After discussing its civil war antecedents, it examines the LPR's ill-defined political responsibility clauses that laid primary responsibility for the civil war on the Popular Front, and its complex bureaucratic structure. It suggests that as a means to extract compensation from individuals, the LPR was inherently flawed. This was demonstrated by the crisis that faced the LPR authorities in Madrid by 1941, as little money had been collected because thousands of investigations remained unopened or unfinished. This crisis prompted the regime to undertake a sweeping reform of the LPR in 1942. The chapter discusses both the reasons why the 1942 reform was a failure in Madrid and elsewhere, and the eventual derogation of the LPR in April 1945.Less
This chapter analyses the implementation of the Law of Political Responsibilities (LPR), the repressive jurisdiction that attempted to wrest economic compensation from those considered guilty of causing the prolonged civil war. After discussing its civil war antecedents, it examines the LPR's ill-defined political responsibility clauses that laid primary responsibility for the civil war on the Popular Front, and its complex bureaucratic structure. It suggests that as a means to extract compensation from individuals, the LPR was inherently flawed. This was demonstrated by the crisis that faced the LPR authorities in Madrid by 1941, as little money had been collected because thousands of investigations remained unopened or unfinished. This crisis prompted the regime to undertake a sweeping reform of the LPR in 1942. The chapter discusses both the reasons why the 1942 reform was a failure in Madrid and elsewhere, and the eventual derogation of the LPR in April 1945.
Iris Marion Young
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195392388
- eISBN:
- 9780199866625
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392388.003.0005
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy
This chapter first discusses the inference that political responsibility is sometimes global in its implications. It takes the theoretical steps toward making the social connection model of ...
More
This chapter first discusses the inference that political responsibility is sometimes global in its implications. It takes the theoretical steps toward making the social connection model of responsibility practically manageable. It then carries the social connection model across borders. It agrees with theorists who argue against the still widely held position that the scope of obligations of justice must be restricted to members of the same nation-state. Some structural social processes are global in scope and condition the lives of many people within diverse nation-state jurisdictions. The chapter introduces an extended example of structural injustice that involves relationships across the world in the global apparel industry. This is a useful example for thinking about what it means to take responsibility for transnational injustice, because in recent years a transborder anti-sweatshop movement has involved a great many people and achieved some success in creating public discussion about the injustice of working conditions, as well as some changes in institutions and practices.Less
This chapter first discusses the inference that political responsibility is sometimes global in its implications. It takes the theoretical steps toward making the social connection model of responsibility practically manageable. It then carries the social connection model across borders. It agrees with theorists who argue against the still widely held position that the scope of obligations of justice must be restricted to members of the same nation-state. Some structural social processes are global in scope and condition the lives of many people within diverse nation-state jurisdictions. The chapter introduces an extended example of structural injustice that involves relationships across the world in the global apparel industry. This is a useful example for thinking about what it means to take responsibility for transnational injustice, because in recent years a transborder anti-sweatshop movement has involved a great many people and achieved some success in creating public discussion about the injustice of working conditions, as well as some changes in institutions and practices.
Myrto Tsakatika
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- July 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780719075155
- eISBN:
- 9781781701621
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Manchester University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7228/manchester/9780719075155.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, European Union
This book addresses the question of political legitimacy in the European Union from the much-neglected angle of political responsibility. It develops an original communitarian approach to legitimacy ...
More
This book addresses the question of political legitimacy in the European Union from the much-neglected angle of political responsibility. It develops an original communitarian approach to legitimacy based on Alasdair MacIntyre's ethics of virtues and practices, that can be contrasted with prevalent liberal-egalitarian and neo-republican approaches. The book argues that a ‘responsibility deficit’, quite distinct from the often discussed ‘democratic deficit’, can be diagnosed in the EU. This is documented in chapters that provide in-depth analysis of accountability, transparency and the difficulties associated with identifying responsibility in European governance. Closing this gap requires going beyond institutional engineering. It calls for gradual convergence towards certain core social and political practices and for the flourishing of the virtues of political responsibility in Europe's nascent political community. Throughout the book, normative political theory is brought to bear on concrete dilemmas of institutional choice faced by the EU during the recent constitutional debates.Less
This book addresses the question of political legitimacy in the European Union from the much-neglected angle of political responsibility. It develops an original communitarian approach to legitimacy based on Alasdair MacIntyre's ethics of virtues and practices, that can be contrasted with prevalent liberal-egalitarian and neo-republican approaches. The book argues that a ‘responsibility deficit’, quite distinct from the often discussed ‘democratic deficit’, can be diagnosed in the EU. This is documented in chapters that provide in-depth analysis of accountability, transparency and the difficulties associated with identifying responsibility in European governance. Closing this gap requires going beyond institutional engineering. It calls for gradual convergence towards certain core social and political practices and for the flourishing of the virtues of political responsibility in Europe's nascent political community. Throughout the book, normative political theory is brought to bear on concrete dilemmas of institutional choice faced by the EU during the recent constitutional debates.
JULIUS RUIZ
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199281831
- eISBN:
- 9780191712999
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199281831.003.0006
- Subject:
- History, European Modern History
This chapter discusses the implementation of the meticulously planned occupational purges in Madrid after 28 March 1939. The influence of the LPR in this ‘cleansing’ process is evident as commissions ...
More
This chapter discusses the implementation of the meticulously planned occupational purges in Madrid after 28 March 1939. The influence of the LPR in this ‘cleansing’ process is evident as commissions established in such diverse sectors as public transport and sport adopted the same definitions of political responsibility to purge the workforce. Such purges were central to the regime's conceptions of ‘security’ and ‘reconstruction’. Nevertheless, their role was specific: they determined whether an individual could continue in his pre-war profession or employment.Less
This chapter discusses the implementation of the meticulously planned occupational purges in Madrid after 28 March 1939. The influence of the LPR in this ‘cleansing’ process is evident as commissions established in such diverse sectors as public transport and sport adopted the same definitions of political responsibility to purge the workforce. Such purges were central to the regime's conceptions of ‘security’ and ‘reconstruction’. Nevertheless, their role was specific: they determined whether an individual could continue in his pre-war profession or employment.
Anchrit Wille
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- September 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199665693
- eISBN:
- 9780191755989
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665693.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, European Union
This chapter links reforms in the legal and political framework of the EU Commission to a transformation that has turned the college of commissioners into a genuinely political rather than a ...
More
This chapter links reforms in the legal and political framework of the EU Commission to a transformation that has turned the college of commissioners into a genuinely political rather than a technocratic body. It first explores how new formal powers for the EP and an increase in parliamentary activism have provided a new context for the EU executive. It then describes how this has changed the recruiting of commissioners, and how the commissioner’s role has been redefined. The college of commissioners has turned into a genuinely political rather than a technocratic body, something that is reflected in its composition and its role expectations. Presidentialism and political professionalism are increasingly shaping the executive role of the Commission.The chapter concludes that a top–down process of politicization has increasingly shaped the executive role of the Commission.Less
This chapter links reforms in the legal and political framework of the EU Commission to a transformation that has turned the college of commissioners into a genuinely political rather than a technocratic body. It first explores how new formal powers for the EP and an increase in parliamentary activism have provided a new context for the EU executive. It then describes how this has changed the recruiting of commissioners, and how the commissioner’s role has been redefined. The college of commissioners has turned into a genuinely political rather than a technocratic body, something that is reflected in its composition and its role expectations. Presidentialism and political professionalism are increasingly shaping the executive role of the Commission.The chapter concludes that a top–down process of politicization has increasingly shaped the executive role of the Commission.
Paul Bowman
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- March 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748617623
- eISBN:
- 9780748652785
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748617623.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Given Stuart Hall’s influential status in cultural studies, this chapter clarifies Hall’s important and influential conception of cultural studies’ purpose and methods of operation. It clarifies that ...
More
Given Stuart Hall’s influential status in cultural studies, this chapter clarifies Hall’s important and influential conception of cultural studies’ purpose and methods of operation. It clarifies that the foundations of his views relate fundamentally both to deconstruction and, crucially, to the deconstructive post-Marxist political theory of Laclau and Mouffe (1985). The chapter points out that Laclau and Mouffe’s theory that culture and politics are contingent and hegemonic has become strongly influential within cultural studies, and also considers the Derridean deconstructive complication or complexification of the idea of the political. Derrida extends the consideration and conception of the political in such a way as to make it inextricable from the institutional and ultimately even the textual. In light of this contribution, the ‘problem’ of post-Marxism and cultural studies that this discussion engages relates to the question of academico-political responsibilities.Less
Given Stuart Hall’s influential status in cultural studies, this chapter clarifies Hall’s important and influential conception of cultural studies’ purpose and methods of operation. It clarifies that the foundations of his views relate fundamentally both to deconstruction and, crucially, to the deconstructive post-Marxist political theory of Laclau and Mouffe (1985). The chapter points out that Laclau and Mouffe’s theory that culture and politics are contingent and hegemonic has become strongly influential within cultural studies, and also considers the Derridean deconstructive complication or complexification of the idea of the political. Derrida extends the consideration and conception of the political in such a way as to make it inextricable from the institutional and ultimately even the textual. In light of this contribution, the ‘problem’ of post-Marxism and cultural studies that this discussion engages relates to the question of academico-political responsibilities.
Myrto Tsakatika
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- July 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780719075155
- eISBN:
- 9781781701621
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Manchester University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7228/manchester/9780719075155.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, European Union
This chapter provides an account of why the EU system of governance presents such serious shortcomings in terms of political responsibility. It starts by going through the principal theories of ...
More
This chapter provides an account of why the EU system of governance presents such serious shortcomings in terms of political responsibility. It starts by going through the principal theories of European integration, in an effort to see what kinds of explanation could be derived from them with regard to the EU's alleged failures of political responsibility. Neo-functionalist, liberal intergovernmentalis and new institutionalist approaches are shown to yield different accounts. By adopting a historical-sociological institutionalist framework, the chapter goes on to show, more specifically, why the problems of political responsibility in the EU emerged: it looks at the legacy of Jean Monnet, whose ideas and methods for European integration exerted a strong influence upon the building of Europe. The main question that is addressed is whether there was something in Monnet's system of thought and action that could have caused problems for the development of political responsibility in the EU, insofar as the rationale behind his approach was influential in the building of the Union.Less
This chapter provides an account of why the EU system of governance presents such serious shortcomings in terms of political responsibility. It starts by going through the principal theories of European integration, in an effort to see what kinds of explanation could be derived from them with regard to the EU's alleged failures of political responsibility. Neo-functionalist, liberal intergovernmentalis and new institutionalist approaches are shown to yield different accounts. By adopting a historical-sociological institutionalist framework, the chapter goes on to show, more specifically, why the problems of political responsibility in the EU emerged: it looks at the legacy of Jean Monnet, whose ideas and methods for European integration exerted a strong influence upon the building of Europe. The main question that is addressed is whether there was something in Monnet's system of thought and action that could have caused problems for the development of political responsibility in the EU, insofar as the rationale behind his approach was influential in the building of the Union.
