Search Results

Republican Democracy

Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira

in Democracy and Public Management Reform: Building the Republican State

In the more developed countries, democracy was liberal in the first part of the twentieth century, social-democratic in the second part, and now is in transition to republican or participative ... More

In the more developed countries, democracy was liberal in the first part of the twentieth century, social-democratic in the second part, and now is in transition to republican or participative democracy. Liberal democracy followed Schumpeter’s definition and was elitist. Social-democracy may also be called “plural” and “public opinion democracy”, in so far as electors’ general views become politicians’ central concern. Recently democracy is turning republican or participatory, as the public space becomes a reality and an increasing number of citizens seek to influence political decisions through civil society’s organizations either representing group interests or directly promoting the public interest. In the future, we may think in a deliberative democracy, as public debate gains density, political advocacy gains strength, and politicians’ accountability is enhanced. A short survey of the literature on participative democracy substantiates the argument.Less

Historical Forms of State

Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira

in Democracy and Public Management Reform: Building the Republican State

A summary of the stages through which the modern state has passed historically. It began as authoritarian and patrimonial in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: it was the absolutist state. In ... More

A summary of the stages through which the modern state has passed historically. It began as authoritarian and patrimonial in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: it was the absolutist state. In the nineteenth century, it turned liberal and bureaucratic: the liberal state imposed the rule of law and assured civil rights. In the first part of the twentieth century, the transition to democracy was completed: it was the time of the liberal state, of elitist or liberal democracy, and, still, of bureaucratic administration. In the second part of that century, the state becomes social-democratic, and assumes a developmental character; democracy now is social or plural rather than just liberal. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the state is aiming to become social-liberal and republican; democracy is aiming to become participatory or republican; and administration is aiming to become managerial, or inspired by the principles of new public management.Less

Beyond Representation: Constitutional Referendums and Deliberative Democracy

Stephen Tierney

in Constitutional Referendums: The Theory and Practice of Republican Deliberation

This chapter considers how the referendum has been appraised within contemporary theories of democracy, setting out the key debates, and establishing points of further enquiry that will enable a ... More

This chapter considers how the referendum has been appraised within contemporary theories of democracy, setting out the key debates, and establishing points of further enquiry that will enable a fuller answer to be offered in the latter chapters of the book. Section II addresses three main concerns raised by critics of referendums: how they are controlled; how popular participation is engaged within a referendum process; and the conditions under which decisions are reached by way of direct democracy. These issues also highlight how attitudes towards direct democracy can vary from one democratic tradition to another. Section III explores the tradition of ‘civic republican democracy’, setting out its key aims and values. The chapter argues that this is a useful turn in constitutional theory both for offering a powerful democratic critique of how contemporary representative democracy has been overpowered by hegemonic interests and in highlighting the importance of popular engagement in processes of constitutional change as a partial remedy for this malaise.Less

Republican Democracy from Reconstruction through 1920

in Free Expression and Democracy in America: A History

The republican democracy simultaneously empowered and constrained a free government of the people. State governments retained their police powers but could not pass laws that were, as it was ... More

The republican democracy simultaneously empowered and constrained a free government of the people. State governments retained their police powers but could not pass laws that were, as it was sometimes phrased, either arbitrary or unreasonable. The transition from the antebellum world lay in the national insistence on republican democracy at the state level and in the definition of “the people.” But Reconstruction era legal changes were ambiguous and could provoke disagreement. Republicans undoubtedly intended to broaden the scope of republican democratic principles by including African Americans within the mandate for equality, yet the Reconstruction amendments and statutes had severe limits.Less

On Neoconservatism

Stephen M. Feldman

in Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy

This chapter begins by describing the rise of the neoconservatives, such as Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Jeane Kirkpatrick. Neocons were liberals reacting against perceived problems with ... More

This chapter begins by describing the rise of the neoconservatives, such as Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Jeane Kirkpatrick. Neocons were liberals reacting against perceived problems with liberalism, especially as recently implemented by Democrats. Many of these former liberals were intellectuals, and as such, they quested for an intellectual foundation to support their increasingly conservative inclinations. They found that foundation in the writings of Strauss, in particular his emphasis on the American founders' principles of political philosophy. The remainder of the chapter discusses neoconservative principles and policies; the inherent instability of pluralist (liberal) democracy; the attack on relativism; the neoconservative goal of resuscitating republican democracy; neoconservative domestic policy; neoconservative foreign policy; neoconservative constitutional theory; and neoconservative successes and failures.Less

4 On Neoconservatism

Stephen M. Feldman

in Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy

This chapter begins by describing the rise of the neoconservatives, such as Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Jeane Kirkpatrick. Neocons were liberals reacting against perceived problems with ... More

This chapter begins by describing the rise of the neoconservatives, such as Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and Jeane Kirkpatrick. Neocons were liberals reacting against perceived problems with liberalism, especially as recently implemented by Democrats. Many of these former liberals were intellectuals, and as such, they quested for an intellectual foundation to support their increasingly conservative inclinations. They found that foundation in the writings of Strauss, in particular his emphasis on the American founders' principles of political philosophy. The remainder of the chapter discusses neoconservative principles and policies; the inherent instability of pluralist (liberal) democracy; the attack on relativism; the neoconservative goal of resuscitating republican democracy; neoconservative domestic policy; neoconservative foreign policy; neoconservative constitutional theory; and neoconservative successes and failures. Less

Republican Democracy from the Revolution, through the Civil War

in Free Expression and Democracy in America: A History

Beginning with the earliest state constitutions, the American people and their elected officials, as well as political and legal theorists, developed a republican democratic system of government. The ... More

Beginning with the earliest state constitutions, the American people and their elected officials, as well as political and legal theorists, developed a republican democratic system of government. The framers of the national Constitution refined the practice and theory of republican democracy, creating a remarkably pliant regime. Then, through the early-nineteenth century, the American people accommodated the constitutional structures to the nation's changing social, cultural, and economic practices. As the Civil War would demonstrate, however, some political disputes could be too vehement for even the flexible republican democratic system to withstand. This chapter discusses republican democracy as the essence of American government; republican democracy in American society; judicial review under republican democracy; and changing interpretations of republican democracy.Less

Free Expression in the Nineteenth Century to 1865

in Free Expression and Democracy in America: A History

This chapter examines the status of free expression through the middle decades of the nineteenth century. The Sedition Act crisis arose within an overarching and decade-long dispute about the nature ... More

This chapter examines the status of free expression through the middle decades of the nineteenth century. The Sedition Act crisis arose within an overarching and decade-long dispute about the nature of republican democracy. Republicans invoked the tradition of dissent as they asserted a right to speak their minds, to criticize the government. Federalists relied upon the tradition of suppression as they sought to silence the voices of (temporary) outsiders, whom the Federalists viewed as a factional and corrupt party. And Republicans and Federalists both seized upon different aspects of the extant law: the doctrine of seditious libel, the Zengerian reforms, the constitutional limits on congressional power, and the implications of the first amendment.Less

The Sedition Act Controversy

in Free Expression and Democracy in America: A History

As President George Washington and his administration tackled the problems confronting the young nation, they began implementing and testing the structures of the new constitutional system. The ... More

As President George Washington and his administration tackled the problems confronting the young nation, they began implementing and testing the structures of the new constitutional system. The Constitution, they learned, was not a smooth-running machine. The framers had hoped that a qualified elite would be elected and appointed to national offices, and would coalesce around a common good. While the framers had expected factionalism, they had not foreseen the imbroglios of the 1790s. These disputes became so ferocious that the Federalists, so recently united in support of constitutional ratification, were rent apart into two opposed “protoparties,” the Republicans and the Federalists. This chapter discusses republican democracy in the 1970s; the Alien and Sedition acts; and consequences of the Sedition Act prosecutions.Less

The Monarchist Option

Jill Edwards

in Anglo-American Relations and the Franco Question, 1945–1955

During the first post-war phase, British and American analysts examined separately the possibility of restoration of the Spanish monarchy as one of the main options for replacing Francisco Franco ... More

During the first post-war phase, British and American analysts examined separately the possibility of restoration of the Spanish monarchy as one of the main options for replacing Francisco Franco with a regime more acceptable to democratic opinion. Questions surrounding the restoration movement which flourished after the war are central to an understanding of the innately contrasted differences in formulation of foreign policy towards Spain of, on the one hand, the monarchical democracy of Britain locked in retreat from empire, and on the other, the republican democracy of the United States determined to enjoy the fruits of its recent success on the international scene. However, growing consensus for a monarchical solution came too late and was never convincing enough to gain the vital support of the British and the Americans who by then were intent on consolidating what security they had in Europe and were in no mood for doubtful experiments.Less

Pluralist Democracy and Judicial Review

in Free Expression and Democracy in America: A History

As the nation emerged from World War I, the Supreme Court as well as the rest of the federal judiciary still exercised the power of judicial review in accordance with republican democracy. Courts ... More

As the nation emerged from World War I, the Supreme Court as well as the rest of the federal judiciary still exercised the power of judicial review in accordance with republican democracy. Courts determined whether governmental actions were either for the common good—and therefore permissible—or for partial or private interests—and therefore impermissible. Such judicial applications of republican democratic principles continued into the mid-1930s for three reasons. First, while the practice of pluralist democracy began to emerge during the early 1930s, the theory did not crystallize until later in the decade. Second, the institutional practice of adjudication, with its emphasis on stare decisis, has a natural reliance on the past, on precedents, on tradition. As such, one would expect the judiciary often to lag behind other institutions when change is afoot. Third, and related to the previous point, federal judges (including Supreme Court justices) receive lifetime appointments. In a time of critical transition, such as the 1930s, many judges would have matured, learned their professional norms, and been appointed to the federal bench during the prior regime. Such judges would be apt to continue applying the principles and doctrines they had become accustomed to earlier in their careers.Less

Free Expression, Pluralist Democracy, and the Supreme Court

in Free Expression and Democracy in America: A History

In the late 1920s and early to mid-1930s, republican democracy was crumbling and the practices of pluralist democracy were developing. While many of these changes in democratic government would not ... More

In the late 1920s and early to mid-1930s, republican democracy was crumbling and the practices of pluralist democracy were developing. While many of these changes in democratic government would not become apparent until later in the 1930s, many scholars had already begun talking about the workings of democracy by the middle of the decade. In this political and intellectual atmosphere, the justices' renewed interest in the free government–free expression maxim hardly seems coincidental. Rather, the free expression cases seemed to augur the coming of the 1937 turn and the Court's acceptance of pluralist democracy.Less

The Supreme Court in the Future

Stephen M. Feldman

in Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy

This chapter argues that despite the neoconservative movement's many successes, its agenda has not been completely fulfilled in any constitutional realm. The neoconservative outlook is most likely to ... More

This chapter argues that despite the neoconservative movement's many successes, its agenda has not been completely fulfilled in any constitutional realm. The neoconservative outlook is most likely to be pressed forward in constitutional realms where it has already gained a foothold, such as in congressional power cases. But the neocons are unlikely to achieve major breakthroughs in other areas, with the possible exception of the Establishment Clause. The second part of the chapter discusses how political progressives (or liberals) should confront the challenge of a neoconservative Supreme Court. It argues that the current state of American culture and society and the entrenchment of pluralist democracy means that a complete return to republican democracy is impossible. Nonetheless, this obstacle has not yet prevented the neoconservative justices from attempting to “cut and paste” elements of republican democracy into the pluralist democratic system.Less

From Republican to Pluralist Democracy

Stephen M. Feldman

in Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy

This chapter discusses events that led to the shift from republican to pluralist democracy in the United States. The United States operated as a republican democracy from the framing through the ... More

This chapter discusses events that led to the shift from republican to pluralist democracy in the United States. The United States operated as a republican democracy from the framing through the 1920s. Citizens and elected officials were supposed to be virtuous: In the political realm, they were to pursue the common good or public welfare rather than their own private interests. However, republican democracy had originally been based on a preindustrial agricultural economy and a relatively homogenous population. By the early twentieth century, most workers were not farmers; they were wage laborers in factories. Deep inequalities and divisions cleaved the American populace and an increasing degree of wealth became concentrated in fewer hands. Immigration further changed the demographic makeup of the American population, with heterogeneity (or plurality) gradually growing into preeminence. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, the republican democratic regime finally collapsed, supplanted by a new one: pluralist democracy. The remainder of the chapter covers the theory and practice of pluralist democracy.Less

2 From Republican to Pluralist Democracy

Stephen M. Feldman

in Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy

This chapter discusses events that led to the shift from republican to pluralist democracy in the United States. The United States operated as a republican democracy from the framing through the ... More

This chapter discusses events that led to the shift from republican to pluralist democracy in the United States. The United States operated as a republican democracy from the framing through the 1920s. Citizens and elected officials were supposed to be virtuous: In the political realm, they were to pursue the common good or public welfare rather than their own private interests. However, republican democracy had originally been based on a preindustrial agricultural economy and a relatively homogenous population. By the early twentieth century, most workers were not farmers; they were wage laborers in factories. Deep inequalities and divisions cleaved the American populace and an increasing degree of wealth became concentrated in fewer hands. Immigration further changed the demographic makeup of the American population, with heterogeneity (or plurality) gradually growing into preeminence. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, the republican democratic regime finally collapsed, supplanted by a new one: pluralist democracy. The remainder of the chapter covers the theory and practice of pluralist democracy. Less

6 The Supreme Court in the Future

Stephen M. Feldman

in Neoconservative Politics and the Supreme Court: Law, Power, and Democracy

This chapter argues that despite the neoconservative movement's many successes, its agenda has not been completely fulfilled in any constitutional realm. The neoconservative outlook is most likely ... More

This chapter argues that despite the neoconservative movement's many successes, its agenda has not been completely fulfilled in any constitutional realm. The neoconservative outlook is most likely to be pressed forward in constitutional realms where it has already gained a foothold, such as in congressional power cases. But the neocons are unlikely to achieve major breakthroughs in other areas, with the possible exception of the Establishment Clause. The second part of the chapter discusses how political progressives (or liberals) should confront the challenge of a neoconservative Supreme Court. It argues that the current state of American culture and society and the entrenchment of pluralist democracy means that a complete return to republican democracy is impossible. Nonetheless, this obstacle has not yet prevented the neoconservative justices from attempting to “cut and paste” elements of republican democracy into the pluralist democratic system. Less

Introduction

in Parité!: Sexual Equality and the Crisis of French Universalism

France today is in the throes of a crisis that began in the last decades of the twentieth century. It is a crisis defined through the rhetoric of universalism—a universalism taken to be uniquely ... More

France today is in the throes of a crisis that began in the last decades of the twentieth century. It is a crisis defined through the rhetoric of universalism—a universalism taken to be uniquely French and therefore a defining trait of the system of republican democracy, its most enduring value, and its most precious political asset. This chapter introduces a book that discusses one of the movements which offered a challenge to the French representative democracy in the 1990s by demanding a recognition of difference. The mouvement pour la parité was a feminist movement that sought to refigure the terms of the French universalism to increase the numbers of women in elective office. The partial realization of that goal came with the law of June 6, 2000, which now requires that half of all candidates for almost all political offices be women. The “parité law” was unprecedented in France and, indeed, throughout the world.Less

“Freedom and Unity”: Lincoln in Irish Political Discourse

Kevin Kenny

in The Global Lincoln

This chapter examines the image and reputation of Abraham Lincoln in Ireland. It explains that Lincoln's posthumous image took shape in Ireland in a context defined by Union because Ireland too was ... More

This chapter examines the image and reputation of Abraham Lincoln in Ireland. It explains that Lincoln's posthumous image took shape in Ireland in a context defined by Union because Ireland too was part a Union. It discusses how the Irish people responded to Lincoln's assassination by emphasizing the enduring power of American republican democracy and the issues that preoccupied Lincoln throughout his career which were featured in modern Irish political history. These include the idea of Union, the brutal realities of civil war, the nature of national sovereignty, the legitimacy of secession, and the qualities of political leadership during times of crisis.Less