Poli 363 Midterm Flashcards
Course Overview
What is radical democracy?
- It is a tradition of democracy that:
1) Understands democracy as a form of society defined in terms of indeterminacy.
2) Emphasizes the transgressive and transformative aspects of democratic politics
Course Overview
What is constitutional democracy?
- Conflicts and the collective (exercise of) power are threats to democratic life when not regulated.
Course Overview
How does constitutional democracy differ from radical democracy?
- Radical democracy suggests that conflicts and the collective (exercise of power) as essential to democratic life.
- Consitutional democracy suggests that conflict and collective (exercise of power) is not essential.
Course Overview
What is radical democracy not?
Two propositions
1) Democratic politics is about managing social conflicts (and achieving social harmony)
2)Democratic politics is about protecting individuals and minorities from the collective (exercise of) power.
Course Overview
What are the main points of proposition one?
Proposition 1 (of what radical democracy is not): Democratic politics is about managing social conflicts (and achieving social harmony)
- Democracy against conflict
- Democratic politics as a mechanism for resolving social conflicts
- The escalation of a conflict leading to violation of equal participation
- Polarization
Course Overview
What are the main points of proposition two?
Proposition 2: Democratic politics is about protecting individuals and minorities from the collective (exercise of) power.
- Democracy against collective power
- Unlimited exercise of collective power stifles individuals’ freedom to express their views and opinions
- Democratic politics reconceived as constraining the collective power (of the people)
- Right wing populism
Course Overview
What are two propositions about “what radical democracy” is about?
Proposition 1: Democratic politics is about creating the scenes of social and political conflicts
Proposition 2: Democratic politics is about constructing a collective agent to fight against existing oppressions, exclusions, and injustices
Course Overview
What is ‘radical’ about radical democracy?
- It is radical in two senses
1) Philosophical sense: Understanding society as having a normative order that is a product of contingency and power.
2) Political sense: Realizing the rule of the people meaningfully
Course Overview
How can radical democracy be characterized?
- A tradition of democratic theory that:
1) Understands democracy as a form of society defined in terms of indeterminacy
2) Emphasizes the transgressive and transformative aspects of democratic politics
Constance on Liberal Democracy
How can we institutionalize popular sovereignty under the ‘modern’ context?
- If we want to institutionalize popular sovereignty, we must radically redefine its meaning and scope
- You require a revolution in order to get a new polity
- Here Constance was comparing ancient liberty and modern
Constance on Liberal Democracy
What is popular sovereignty?
- Popular sovereignty as “an active and constant participation in collective power” is both unfeasible and undesirable under the ‘modern’ context.
- Involves non-subjection = new liberty
Constance on Liberal Democracy
What is the difference between ancient and modern popular sovereignty?
- Ancient = collective self-determination
- Modern = non-subjection to arbitrary power
Constance on Liberal Democracy
What is modern democracy?
- A particular form of society that has emerged out of a democratic revolution
- Social turmoil -> no social order -> reinvent society
- It involves going from non-subjection to arbitrary power
- The government and representatives are the law, and the people are outside of the law
- The people are the constitution, the constitution is what limits the power of the president
- Bottom up process: people -> sovereign (lower less power…)
Constance on Liberal Democracy
Why is collective self-determination undesirable?
- It is invisible
- There are three main reasons:
1) No pleasure in exercising rights for moderns (no reward for participation)
2) Highly ineffective: - People have material resources, it is constantly for the government to manage it
Private property -> individuals deal with business
3) Individual independence: - When people collectively act it harms individuals freedoms, people should be able to do what’s best for them
- Radical faction: rousseau (people can go beyond the law)
Constance on Liberal Democracy
Is there space for political participation in liberal democracy?
- Constance is not saying that there is no room for political participation he is saying that it does play a role
- Modern liberty needs participation but individual liberty is more important
- Political liberty is meant to secure individuals rights, it guarantees rights
Constance on Liberal Democracy
How can politics and individuality be characterized in society?
- Political= passive
- Individual= active
Constance on Liberal Democracy
What is political liberty?
- It is indispensable, it is a guarantee of political liberty
Constance on Liberal Democracy
What is the ultimate difference between ancient and modern democracy?
- In ancient democracy there was no meaningful domain, all lines of life were politicized
- In modern democracy we need to have a bigger private domain, politics are marginally important.
Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What question does Marx ask himself?
- Why do social discriminations and inequalities persist in a modern democratic society? Can democracy redress them?
Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
Why do social discriminations and inequalities persist in a modern democratic society? Can democracy redress them?
- Discriminations and inequalities persist because modern democracy is instituted with the private-public division.
- It cannot as long as democracy is constituted by this division.
- The division between political and social inequality is intentional and meant to happen in a democratic society.
- Democracy is based upon division between political and social, the division between public and private emerges from this (socioeconomic inequality)
Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What does Marx think about democratic revolutions?
- He does not think that political emancipation leads to liberty, equality or fraternity
- He thinks that democratic revolutions create a division of the human being into a public man and a private man
Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
How does this division lead to inequality, unfreedom, and separation of individuals?
- There are two steps to answering this question:
1) Examining the logic behind the emergence of the private-public division
2) Comparing the views of Marx and Constant on ‘modern liberty
Marx Versus Constance
What is the ultimate difference between Marx and Constance?
- For Marx political/private division and liberal democracy does not lead to freedom, for Constance it does.
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is the Jewish question about?
- Emancipation
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is political emancipation?
- It was a result of revolution to the institutions of inequality.
- Political emancipation was:
1) “the emancipation of the state from […] the religion in general” - Religion represents particularities liberating the state from the private sphere
2) “the emancipation of civil society from politics” - Liberating people from politics
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What are key notions that Marx interrogates?
1) Civil society:
- The market. Satisfying one’s needs through market exchange.
2) State:
- The public domain. Individuals recognizing one another as fellow citizens.
3) Species-being:
- A full realization of oneself.
**Civil society and state are the most important
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What was the Jewish question?
- How can we free the Jews?
- A letter written by Bauer
- However, Marx criticizes Bauer
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is Bauer’s answer to the Jewish Question?
- You achieve emancipation through constructing a secular state.
- State becomes neutral and people participate as citizens that would solve discrimination.
- Secular (universal) state “the man frees himself though the medium of the state, that […] he raises himself above [a] limitation”
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
Does Marx think that the construction of a secular state undo religious privileges?
- No it does not because religion represents the particular that generates inequality.
- The secular state is pushing social distinctions to the private domain, but the issue is private people are also public
- Abolishing the property qualification for election is NOT the same as abolishing private property.
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What does Marx think about the secular state?
- He thinks it is ridiculous that in order to build a secular society you need a private domain.
- The secular state affirms social distinctions (civil society) in the process of constructing itself as the universal domain devoid of particularities.
- The secular state rejects the possibility that social distinctions can exist publicly
- It through affirming that social distinctions are private makes them public, it acknowledges there existence while not acknowledging they exist publicly
Overall:
Civil society: the realm of factual distinction
State: The realm of normative equality
Step 1: Marx’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What happened to politics according to Marx?
- The ‘political’ nature of the feudal order = economic activities were tied to political obligations (economic life directed by the person of the lord)
- Democratic revolutions severed the link between economic and political life by abolishing judicial distinctions.
- “The political revolution […] freed [the political spirit] from its intermixture with civil life, and established it as the [independent] sphere of the community.”
- There is no gap between economic activities and political duty
- Economic life was political in nature during the feudal time.
- Democratic revolutions severed the tie, they no longer define each other.
Step 2: Marx Versus Constance
What do Marx and Constance agree on?
- They agree on the need for political life, and the division between private and public exists
Step 2: Marx Versus Constance
What do Marx and Constance disagree about in regard to individual independence?
- Constance believes that political liberty is the most powerful because it promotes self-development, it helps develop characters
- Marx believed that individual independence is the source of inequality and unfreedom.
Step 2: Marx Versus Constance
Why is individual independence a source of inequality?
- He believed that Constance was being unrealistic in regard to expectations
- Given he is a materialist argues that you can not separate the person and the self
- Political revolutions make private life part of politics
Step 2: Marx Versus Constance
What is the ultimate difference between Constance and Marx?
- Constance: The private and public domain are separate
- Marx: The public domain is overshadowed by the private domain, there is no gap between the two when you participate in politics yourself and are criticized.
Step 2: Marx Versus Constance
What is wrong with modern democracy and democratic politics?
- Modern democracy affirms and upholds social distinctions as the source of discriminations and inequalities in everyday life.
- Democratic politics cannot do anything to redress those discriminations and inequalities.
Step 2: Marx Versus Constance
What does Marx ultimately think about modern democracy?
- He thinks that modern democracy is doomed because it affirms and holds societal distinctions
- State can not be not private, there will always be social inequalities
- There is no freedom in modern democracy, even though Constance thinks so
Summary of Marx’s View on Democracy
What is Marx’s view on democracy?
- Modern democracy affirms social distinctions as the source of inequality and discrimination in everyday life.
- The advent of modern democracy involves the institution of civil society as an independent domain (from the state).
- It may be natural that people may be equal in terms of their citizenship but not outside the political realm.
Summary of Marx’s View on Democracy
What is Marx’s view on democratic politics?
- Democratic politics is incapable of resolving social inequality and discrimination.
- Politics merely reflects and serves the ‘interest’ of civil society.
- People in different social strata but only certain strata are represented
- Political equality is a facade
Summary of Marx’s View on Democracy
Can democracy ever result in a society?
- No, you can have a democracy not a society as long as politics is dominated by certain people.
Summary of Marx’s View on Democracy
What is modern democracy?
- A particular form of society that has emerged out of a democratic revolution.
- It is also a social construct and fictional because we are still void of order.
Summary of Marx’s View on Democracy
Why is there a void of order?
- Democracy is merely an aggregation of individuals within a certain physical space.
- Four other reasons:
1) No rules of disciplines: unlimited (unregulated) freedom, nothing to force behavior, people are free to do what you want with your body
2) No social bond: no meaningful relationship (only contractual relationship at best), no notion of a friendly community,only interact because of contract, it is never genuine, no rules or customs
3) No social script:
Summary of Marx’s View on Democracy
How does democracy handle this void of order?
- It distributes people where they belong so they can have a sense of community
Summary of Marx’s View on Democracy
How does democracy differ from the feudal order?
- In the feudal order everyone automatically knew where they belonged, there were set expectations however, now there are not expectations and people have to find their own sense of community.
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What question does Schmitt ask himself? What is his answer?
Question:
- What causes the social disintegration of modern democracy, and how does a democracy achieve its social cohesiveness?
Answer:
- Liberalism is a source of social disintegration. Democracy achieves unity through the actualization of the will of the people.
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
Who is Carl Schmitt?
- A lover of Nazis and Hitler
- Strong Catholic background
- Most active during the Weimar period
- The ‘Crown Jurist’ of National Socialism (Nazism) until 1936
- One of the most controversial legal and political theorists of the twentieth century
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is Schmitt’s main focus?
- Schmitt is known as the 20th century Thomas Hobbes
- His main focus were the same as Hobbes security and stability
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
Why is liberal democracy in the midst of a crisis?
- The advent of ‘mass’ democracy
- The inability of modern society to implement and guarantee order and security in the face of heterogeneous masses
- Integration of lower class into politics
- Development of less homogenous
- Modern democracy can not handle mass immigration
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
How did the Weimar Republic influence/impact Schmitt’s views?
- The political experiment of the Weimar Republic
- Extensive civil and political rights, some 40 political parties, vibrant civil society, 240 emergency measures
- Women got political rights
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is Schmitt’s main argument?
- Liberal democracy is incapable of making a collective decision, let alone a meaningful one.
- The problem is not on democracy, it is on liberalism
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is the main contradiction which illustrates the crisis of liberal democracy?
- Between liberalism and democracy
- Liberalism divides and democracy unites
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What are the qualities of liberalism and democracy in principle and practice ?
Liberalism:
- Principle: Freedom and g eneral human equality
- Practice: parliamentary democracy
Democracy:
- Principle: Substantial equality
- Dictatorship
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is Schmitt’s Rechsstaat (Rule of law)?
- It is an actualization of liberal principle of democracy
- It is a set of procedures does not give meaningful connections between peoples
- There to overlook whether individuals go beyond their private realm
- Political realm for Schmitt there is meaning in rules and relationships
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What is parliamentarianism?
- Based on the metaphysical or ‘theological’ conviction that:
1) The truth and harmony can be achieved by “an unrestrained clash” of conflicting opinions ( “a dialect-dynamic process of discussion”)
2) An equilibrium can be arrived at by a moderate and balanced discussion
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What does Schmitt like about parliamentarianism?
- That while it worked in early history it does not work now
- Collaboration required to make a decision not the same as during a kingship
- The logic is metaphysical
- Based on the idea of openness and discussion
- People reach consensus based on unrestrained conversation
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What makes parliamentarianism liberal?
- It is liberal because it is unrestrained
- Exchange = good for society
- Market = establish price
- Members = establish laws
- People engage in moderate discussion = equilibrium
- Difference between private and public
Schmitt’s Critique of Liberal Democracy
What caused the crisis of parliamentarianism?
- The incorporation of ‘masses’ into politics (mobilization as opposed to discussion)
- The rise of radical parties (ex., communists and Nazis) cause confrontation as opposed to communication
Constituional Democracy
What is an issue with modern democracy according to Marx?
- Pursuing (material) self- interest was never the sore intention behind founding modern democracy.
Constituional Democracy
What is an issue with modern democracy according to Constant?
- ‘Limited government’ is never the final goal and purpose of modern democracy.
Constituional Democracy: Hannah Arendt
Who is Hannah Arendt?
- One of the most influential political theorists in the twentieth century
- Born into a German-Jewish family, fled Germany in 1933 and immigrated to the United States in 1941
- A political theorist and commentator
Constituional Democracy: Hannah Arendt
What is she known for?
- Major works include Origins of Totalitarianism, Human Condition, and On Revolution
- Wrote about the issue of racism, war etc
- Did not write any feminist theory
Constitutional Democracy: Marx vs Arendt
How does Marx view modern democracy?
- Revolution does not bring modern democracy (liberty, equality, fraternity)
Constitutional Democracy: Marx vs Arendt
What is meant by liberty, equality and fraternity in Marx case?
- Liberty: Freedom to sell one’s labor in the market (form a contract) leading to alienation
- Equality: The right to private property leading to economic inequality
- Fraternity: The right to private property constituting individuals as “an isolated monad”:
Constitutional Democracy: Marx vs Arendt
Is Marx a totalitarian?
- Not necessarily but he went in this direction
Constitutional Democracy: Marx vs Arendt
What is the question Marx asks that Arendt seeks to answer?
- How does constitutional democracy makes individuals free and equal while generating a sense of community among them.
Constitutional Democracy: Marx vs Arendt
How does Arendt respond to Marx’s question?
- By redefining freedom and equality in a political (as opposed to an economic) term.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
What characterizes individuals in modern democracy?
1) Free in the sense that they constantly shape the political community in an unpredictable and original way (through act and speech).
2)Equal in the sense that they are neither ruled by others nor ruling others.
3)Collective in the sense that they construct the common world by deciding with others.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
What is politics for Arendt?
- The (common) world-building activity
It involves, action/speech, appearance, plurality, in-betweenness, spontaneity, freedom, power
Human beings use speech to persuade others and exchange ideas
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
What is freedom for Arendt?
- She associates freedom with what is generated from speech.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
Does Arendt agree with totalitarianism?
- No, because action/speech requires plurality of individuals and totalitarianism does not allow for space.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
What is Arendt’s understanding of the human condition?
- She defines humans in terms of act and speech.
- Constructing a common world together with others through deliberation
- It is in the public sphere
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
How does Arendt’s understanding of the human condition differ from Marx?
- Unlike Marx who defines it in terms of labor and work
- Labor: what humains or any living animals do for their survival
- Work: making instruments for consumption
Private sphere
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
How does Arendt relate to Aristotle?
- Both her and him suggest that human beings are speech animals
- Speech is a unique quality of human beings
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Marx
Why is labour an issue for Arendt?
- Because it has led to the privatization of the political realm
- The public sphere has become dominated by household affairs (economy)
- We can no longer find speech in our life
- Labour has become the dominant agenda.
- We love politics when we start talking about economic growth.
- We love integrity as a community by speaking of the economy in politics
Constitutional Democracy: Review of Constance
How does Constance define popular sovereignty?
- He defines it as the non-subjection to arbitrary power
- This is the modern conception
Constitutional Democracy: Review of Constance
What is the ancient conception of popular sovereignty?
- Collective self-determination
Constitutional Democracy: Review of Constance
What is individual liberty?
- Individual liberty […] is the true modern liberty. Political liberty is its guarantee, consequently political liberty is indispensable.”
- “Individual independence is the first need of the moderns: consequently one must never require from them any sacrifices to establish political liberty”
Constitutional Democracy: Review of Constance
How did Constance idealize government?
- He believes in limited government similar to Hobbes
- There is a sovereign that governs everyone in the public domain.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
What does Arendt think about liberal democracy?
- […] the Constitution was by no means the safeguard of civil liberties but the establishment of an entirely new system of power (147).”
- “[…] the main question for [the founders] certainly was not how to limit power but how to establish it, not how to limit government but how to found a new one (148).”
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
What question is Arendt attempting to answer?
- What are the founding principles of constitutional democracy that have come to determine this new society’s character is it not for limiting government.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
How does Arendt answer the question regarding Constance?
- You give reasons for existence of constitutional democracy
- Mutual promise, the separation between power and law, checks and balances, and the bottom-up legitimation process
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
What is power for Arendt?
- It is the “world-building capacity of man”
- It is the source of constant confusion
- This constant confusion does not relate well with two types of social contract theory
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
How is Constant confused?
- He did not understand the distinction between ‘consent’ and mutual promise
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
What are the two types of contracts in socities?
1) Mutual promise
2) Social contract/mutual subjection
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
What is the mutual promise type of contract?
- People join a community based on reciprocity promises
- But as an agreement in which an individual person resigns his power to some higher authority and consent to be ruled in exchange for a reasonable protection of his life and property
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
What is the social-contract/ mutual subjection type of contract?
- Arendt does not support this view
- Involves surrendering your rights to a higher authority (169).
- You give up your rights and powers
- There are two types
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt Response to Constance
What are the two types of social contract?
1) Between individuals and supposedly give birth to society (concludes between individuals)
2) Between a people and its ruler and supposedly resulted in legitimate government (169)
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt on Revolution
How does Arendt differ from Schmitt in regard to revolution?
- For Arendt revolution does not presuppose the creation of law.
- Law comes from the people
- “Both power and law were anchored in the nation […], which remained outside and above all governments and all laws (163).” (= the nation as ‘constituent power’)
- “[…] the so-called the will of a multitude is ever-changing by definition, and that a structure built on it as its foundation is built on quicksand (163).”
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt on Revolution
How does the will of the people lead to dictatorship?
- Because the law comes from the people, and the will of the people is continuously changing, it leads to unstable laws and subsequently a dictatorship.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt on Revolution
How does Arendt understand the American Revolution?
- Arendt argues that there was the question of the sovereign people during the American Revolution
- There is a distinction between a constitution and the people, which leads to a fragile constitution
- In the United States no one questions the legitimacy of the constitution because the constitution gave the american revolutionaries a way to act.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt on Revolution
Why is the constitution placed before the people in the United States?
- Because the people are not the constitution
- In America there were self governing bodies prior to the constitution
- Meaning of the constitution was now to conduct communication between the pre-existing government type bodies.
- The Constitution limits one’s power but also limits it.
Constitutional Democracy: Arendt on Revolution
Is representation effective in government?
- The representatives are not the representatives who are autonomous but rather decisions are made at the distinct level-up order (bottom up)
- The most legitimate process is not top-down but bottom up
Constituional Democracy: Arendt on Power
What is power?
- Cooperative rather than competitive
- Exercised horizontally rather than vertically
- Emerges between individuals rather than being possessed
- Produces rather than negates
- Power implied ‘power-with’ (vr. ‘power-against’)
Constituional Democracy: Arendt on Power
How is power endangered and protected?
- “[…] power [is] engendered by action and kept by [mutual] promises (176).”
