This book presents an overview of Jean–Jacques Rousseau's work from a political science perspective. Was Rousseau — the great theorist of the French Revolution—really a conservative? The text argues that the author of ‘The Social Contract’ was a constitutionalist much closer to Madison, Montesquieu, and Locke than to revolutionaries. Outlining his profound opposition to Godless materialism and revolutionary change, this book finds parallels between Rousseau and Burke, as well as showing that Rousseau developed the first modern theory of nationalism. It presents an integrated political analysis of Rousseau's educational, ethical, religious and political writings.
Frédéric Le Marcis, Luisa Enria, Sharon Abramowitz, Almudena-Mari Saez and Sylvain Landry B. Faye
, 2015 ; Richardson et al. , 2016 ; Wilkinson and Fairhead, 2017 ). Externally imposed
structural adjustment in the 1980s hollowed out all (non-military) essential state
functions. This, in turn, transformed citizens’ relation to and expectations
of the postcolonial state and its legitimacy. Exacerbated by experiences of conflict
and instability, weak health sectors and economies and an eroded socialcontract set
the foundations for the crisis of 2014. The place of these countries in
looming environmental disasters. Domestically, the liberal socialcontract is
coming apart in many Western states as the coalition of those who have not benefited from the
decades of wealth accumulation after 1979 turns to populist politicians and looks for scapegoats,
with experts, immigrants and Muslims seen as prime targets. The commitment to liberal
institutions that create limits to the scope of political competition – rights, the rule
of law, freedom of the press – and to the basic level of respect due to all persons, be
they citizens or refugees
Harrison’s and Minkin’s seminal studies, just seven other monographs
appeared: Irving Richter’s studies of the politics of three affiliated unions (1973);
Leo Panitch’s study of incomes policy (1976); William Muller’s study of unionsponsored MPs (1977); Lewis Minkin’s study of the Labour Party Conference
(1978); Derek Fatchett’s study of the first struggle over political fund ballots
(1987); Andrew Taylor’s analysis of the link during the SocialContract era and its
aftermath (1987); and Paul Webb’s study of the link’s institutional forms and of
union members’ electoral
intervention has to be balanced
by a dialogic relationship between scientists and society. In the end our
proposal is about a socialcontract: scientists obtain freedom but guarantee
self-regulation and an active dialogue with society.
Governing risk in the European Union
In the experience of the EU, two foundations of risk regulation have emerged.
Broadly speaking, we can call one foundation evidence-based policy and
the other the precautionary principle. Evidence-based policy is, in principle,
the main foundation of regulatory decision-making in the OECD countries
be more open to other experiences, other tools.
This chapter divides roughly into two parts. The first part introduces briefly the polarity of universalism and relativism that structures much of what it is possible to say on human rights – chapter 3 explores this theme further. The chapter then looks at the story of the Lockean socialcontract, as one still potent myth of the origin for human rights and more broadly as a mechanism for conceptualising the human political community and ethics in the liberal state. The adequacy of these
govern our major
institutions, Rawls draws upon the socialcontract tradition in order to
develop a method which he hopes can secure agreement on a particular
conception of justice.
Rawls’s guiding idea is that the principles which should
be adopted are those which rational persons, concerned to further their own
interests, would agree upon in an initial position of equality. In order to
model this initial
Given the significant similarities and differences between the welfare states of Northern Europe and their reactions to the perceived 'refugee crisis' of 2015, the book focuses primarily on the three main cases of Denmark, Sweden and Germany. Placed in a wider Northern European context – and illustrated by those chapters that also discuss refugee experiences in Norway and the UK – the Danish, Swedish and German cases are the largest case studies of this edited volume. Thus, the book contributes to debates on the governance of non-citizens and the meaning of displacement, mobility and seeking asylum by providing interdisciplinary analyses of a largely overlooked region of the world, with two specific aims. First, we scrutinize the construction of the 2015 crisis as a response to the large influx of refugees, paying particular attention to the disciplinary discourses and bureaucratic structures that are associated with it. Second, we investigate refugees’ encounters with these bureaucratic structures and consider how these encounters shape hopes for building a new life after displacement. This allows us to show that the mobility of specific segments of the world’s population continues to be seen as a threat and a risk that has to be governed and controlled. Focusing on the Northern European context, our volume interrogates emerging policies and discourses as well as the lived experiences of bureaucratization from the perspective of individuals who find themselves the very objects of bureaucracies.
and the provision of social security.
2 From socialcontract to zero tolerance
From Cesare Beccaria in the eighteenth
century to Hart and Rawls in the twentieth, 10 liberal theories of punishment have
attempted to combine the general deterrence of crime with due retribution
against actual criminals. In eighteenth-century theories, criminal law was
regarded as an expression of the general will. As such, it was believed not
liberalism as being androcentric, the second criticises the extent to which
elements of the classical tradition are imported into the liberal model of
socialcontract theory and the third criticises the actual patriarchal
practices of ‘liberal’ regimes. While the first of these
feminist critiques directly rejects the liberal conception of the
public–private distinction, the second suggests that liberalism has