DOCSLIB.ORG

Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty Author(S): Thomas W

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty Author(S): Thomas W Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty Author(s): Thomas W. Pogge Reviewed work(s): Source: Ethics, Vol. 103, No. 1 (Oct., 1992), pp. 48-75 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2381495 . Accessed: 05/03/2013 13:01 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ethics. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded on Tue, 5 Mar 2013 13:01:55 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Cosmopolitanismand Sovereignty* ThomasW. Pogge The human future suddenly seems open. This is an inspiration;we can step back and thinkmore freely.Instead of containmentor detente, politicalscientists are discussinggrand pictures:the end of history,or the inevitableproliferation and mutualpacifism of capitalistdemocracies. And politiciansare speaking of a new world order. My inspirationis a littlemore concrete. Afterdeveloping a rough, cosmopolitan spec- ificationof our task to promote moral progress, I offeran idea for gradual global institutionalreform. Dispersing political authority over nested territorialunits would decrease the intensityof the struggle for power and wealth withinand among states,thereby reducing the incidence of war, poverty,and oppression. In such a multilayered scheme, borders could be redrawn more easily to accord with the aspirationsof peoples and communities. INSTITUTIONAL COSMOPOLITANISM BASED ON HUMAN RIGHTS Three elements are shared by all cosmopolitan positions. First,indi- vidualism: the ultimate units of concern are human beings, or persons- rather than, say, familylines, tribes,ethnic, cultural, or religious communities,nations, or states. The lattermay be units of concernonly indirectly, in virtueof theirindividual members or citizens. Second, universality:the statusof ultimateunit of concern attaches to everyliving human being equally2- not merelyto some subset,such as men, aristocrats,Aryans, whites, or Muslims. Third, generality:this * This essay has benefited from various incisive comments and suggestions by Andreas F0llesdal, Bonnie Kent, Ling Tong, and myfellow participants at the "Ethikon East/WestDialogue Conferenceon the Restructuringof Politicaland Economic Systems," held in Berlin in January 1991, with fundingprovided by the Pew Charitable Trusts. 1. The differencesbetween the notions of a person and a human being are not essential to the present discussion. 2. There is some debate about the extent to which we should give weightto the interestsof futurepersons and also to those of past ones (whose deaths are stillrecent). I leave thisissue aside because itis at rightangles to the debate betweencosmopolitanism and its alternatives. Ethics103 (October 1992): 48-75 C 1992 by The Universityof Chicago. All rightsreserved. 0014-1704/93/0301-0948$0 1.00 48 This content downloaded on Tue, 5 Mar 2013 13:01:55 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Pogge Cosmopolitanism 49 special status has global force. Persons are ultimateunits of concern for everyone-not only for their compatriots,fellow religionists,or such like. Let me separate three cosmopolitan approaches by introducing two distinctions.The firstis that between legal and moral cosmopol- itanism. Legal cosmopolitanismis committedto a concrete political ideal of a global order under which all persons have equivalent legal rightsand duties, that is, are fellowcitizens of a universal republic.3 Moral cosmopolitanismholds that all persons stand in certain moral relations to one another: we are required to respect one another's statusas ultimateunits of moral concern-a requirementthat imposes limitsupon our conductand, in particular,upon our effortsto construct institutionalschemes. This view is more abstract,and in this sense weaker than,legal cosmopolitanism:though compatible with the latter, it is also compatible with other patterns of human interaction,for example, witha systemof autonomous statesand even witha plurality of self-containedcommunities. Here I presenta variantof moral cos- mopolitanism,though below I also discuss whetherthis position man- dates effortsto move fromour global statusquo in the directionof a more cosmopolitanworld order (in the sense of legal cosmopolitanism). The central idea of moral cosmopolitanismis that every human being has a global statureas an ultimateunit of moral concern. Such moral concern can be fleshed out in countless ways. One may focus on subjective goods and ills (human happiness, desire fulfillment, preferencesatisfaction, or pain avoidance) or on more objectiveones (such as human need fulfillment,capabilities, opportunities,or re- sources). Also, one might relativizethese measures, for example, by defining the key ill as being worse off than anyone need be, or as fallingbelow the mean-which is equivalentto replacingstraightforward aggregation (sum ranking or averaging) by a version of maximin or equalitarianism,respectively. In order to get to my topic quickly,I do not discuss these mattersbut simplyopt for a variant of moral cos- mopolitanism that is formulated in terms of human rights (with straightforwardaggregation).4 In doing so, I capture what most other variantslikewise consider essential. And my furtherreflections can, 3. One recent argument for a world state is advanced in Kai Nielsen, "World Government,Security, and Global Justice,"in Problemsof InternationalJustice, ed. Steven Luper-Foy (Boulder, Colo.: Westview,1988). 4. I have in mind here a rather minimal conception of human rights,one that rules out trulysevere abuses, deprivations,and inequalitieswhile stillbeing compatible witha wide range of political,moral, and religious cultures.The recent development of, and progress within,both governmentaland nongovernmentalinternational or- ganizations supports the hope, I believe, that such a conception might,in our world, become the object of a worldwideoverlapping consensus. Compare Thomas W. Pogge, RealizingRawls (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell UniversityPress, 1989), chap. 5. This content downloaded on Tue, 5 Mar 2013 13:01:55 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 50 Ethics October1992 in any case, easily be generalized to other variantsof moral cosmo- politanism. My second distinctionlies within the domain of the moral. It concerns the nature of the moral constraintsto be imposed. An insti- tutionalconception postulates certain fundamental principles of justice. These apply to institutionalschemes and are thus second-orderprin- ciples: standards for assessing the ground rules and practices that regulate human interactions.An interactionalconception, by contrast, postulatescertain fundamentalprinciples of ethics.These principles, like institutionalground rules,are firstorder in thatthey apply directly to the conduct of persons and groups.5 Interactionalcosmopolitanism assigns direct responsibility for the fulfillmentof human rightsto other (individualand collective)agents, whereas institutionalcosmopolitanism assigns such responsibilityto institutionalschemes. On the latterview, the responsibilityof persons is then indirect-a shared responsibilityfor the justice of any practices one supports: one ought not to participatein an unjust institutional scheme (one that violates human rights)without making reasonable effortsto aid its victimsand to promote institutionalreform. Institutionaland interactionalconceptions are again compatible and thus may be combined.6 Here I focus, however,on a variant of institutionalcosmopolitanism while leaving open the question of its supplementationby a variantof interactionalcosmopolitanism. I hope to show that making the institutionalview primaryleads to a much strongerand more plausibleoverall morality. Let us beginby examining how our two approaches would yield differentaccounts of human rightsand human rightsviolations. On the interactionalview, human rightsimpose constraintson conduct,while on the institutionalview theyimpose constraintsupon 5. Interactionalcosmopolitanism has been defendedin numerousworks. A paradigm example is Henry Shue, Basic Rights(Princeton, N.J.: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1980). Luban, another advocate of this position, puts the point as follows: "A human right, then, will be a right whose beneficiariesare all humans and whose obligors are all humans in a position to effectthe right"(David Luban, "JustWar and Human Rights," in InternationalEthics, ed. Charles Beitz et al. [Princeton,N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1985], p. 209). Robert Nozick's Anarchy,State, and Utopia (New York: Basic, 1974)- howeversurprising the rightshe singlesout as fundamental- is also an instance of interactionalcosmopolitanism. For institutionalcosmopolitanism, see Charles Beitz, PoliticalTheory and InternationalRelations (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton UniversityPress, 1979), pt. 3, and "Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Sentiment,"Journal of Philosophy 80 (1983): 591-600; and Pogge, RealizingRawls, chap. 6. 6. This is done, e.g., by John Rawls, who asserts (i) a natural duty to uphold and promotejust institutionsand also (ii) various othernatural duties
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CRITICAL THEORY and AUTHORITARIAN POPULISM Critical Theory and Authoritarian Populism
    CDSMS EDITED BY JEREMIAH MORELOCK CRITICAL THEORY AND AUTHORITARIAN POPULISM Critical Theory and Authoritarian Populism edited by Jeremiah Morelock Critical, Digital and Social Media Studies Series Editor: Christian Fuchs The peer-reviewed book series edited by Christian Fuchs publishes books that critically study the role of the internet and digital and social media in society. Titles analyse how power structures, digital capitalism, ideology and social struggles shape and are shaped by digital and social media. They use and develop critical theory discussing the political relevance and implications of studied topics. The series is a theoretical forum for in- ternet and social media research for books using methods and theories that challenge digital positivism; it also seeks to explore digital media ethics grounded in critical social theories and philosophy. Editorial Board Thomas Allmer, Mark Andrejevic, Miriyam Aouragh, Charles Brown, Eran Fisher, Peter Goodwin, Jonathan Hardy, Kylie Jarrett, Anastasia Kavada, Maria Michalis, Stefania Milan, Vincent Mosco, Jack Qiu, Jernej Amon Prodnik, Marisol Sandoval, Se- bastian Sevignani, Pieter Verdegem Published Critical Theory of Communication: New Readings of Lukács, Adorno, Marcuse, Honneth and Habermas in the Age of the Internet Christian Fuchs https://doi.org/10.16997/book1 Knowledge in the Age of Digital Capitalism: An Introduction to Cognitive Materialism Mariano Zukerfeld https://doi.org/10.16997/book3 Politicizing Digital Space: Theory, the Internet, and Renewing Democracy Trevor Garrison Smith https://doi.org/10.16997/book5 Capital, State, Empire: The New American Way of Digital Warfare Scott Timcke https://doi.org/10.16997/book6 The Spectacle 2.0: Reading Debord in the Context of Digital Capitalism Edited by Marco Briziarelli and Emiliana Armano https://doi.org/10.16997/book11 The Big Data Agenda: Data Ethics and Critical Data Studies Annika Richterich https://doi.org/10.16997/book14 Social Capital Online: Alienation and Accumulation Kane X.
    [Show full text]
  • Sage. Cosmopolitan Liberalism and Its Limits Craig Calhoun Cosmopolit
    Forthcoming in R. Robertson, ed.: Cosmopolitanism. London: Sage. Cosmopolitan Liberalism and its Limits Craig Calhoun Cosmopolitanism is in fashion. It is valued in clothing style and eating habits, leisure travel and business connections, musical taste and ethical commitments. I have previously criticized the too easy conflation of these different dimensions. This tends to give a tone of moral self- righteousness to matters of personal style, and it tends to deflect attention from the extent to which these sorts of cosmopolitanism rest on positions of personal privilege. I have termed this the “class consciousness of frequent travelers”. Here, I want to take up a different but related theme, the renewal of political liberalism as cosmopolitanism. Most versions of cosmopolitanism are contained within liberalism. They are grounded in thinking about individuals – their rights, tastes, and potential travels through the world, and indeed also their ethical obligations. They have much less to say about social transformations that would raise the opportunities and standards of living of the poor or collective struggles that might bring these about. In this they share something with 19th century bourgeois liberalism. Compared to previous aristocratic closure of opportunities it helped underwrite a new openness. But it offered much less to struggles to transform capitalist inequalities. And it was often actively hostile to attempts by craft workers and others to defend their traditional communities.i So it is today with those enthusiastic about a range of new technologies and willing to accept the economic relations that shape their distribution and use. There is a tension running through modern history between struggles to open new individual opportunities – for those with the resources to take them up – and struggles to transform social structures to benefit those much less well off.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Sociology of First Amendment Silence Mae Kuykendall
    Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly Volume 42 Article 3 Number 4 Summer 2015 1-1-2015 Evaluating the Sociology of First Amendment Silence Mae Kuykendall Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Mae Kuykendall, Evaluating the Sociology of First Amendment Silence, 42 Hastings Const. L.Q. 695 (2015). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol42/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Evaluating the Sociology of First Amendment Silence by MAE KUYKENDALL* Introduction Silence is that curious answer to the riddle, "What is golden and disappears when you speak its name?" In the context of First Amendment jurisprudence, Silence is just as puzzling as a riddle. Silence may be used as a verb, as in, to cause a speaker to cease speaking or as a noun, as in, the absence of speaking or sound. In either form, Silence has long been recognized as a rhetorical vehicle for expression. As it is wont to do, Silence often sits quietly in the interstices of First Amendment doctrine. But when she speaks, she roars. When Silence becomes speech, and that speech becomes law, Silence can get a thumping for its unseemly intrusion. The thumping of silence as legal doctrine, such as it has been, was a product of the Court's rescue of the Boy Scouts in Boy Scouts of America v.
    [Show full text]
  • People's Power
    #2 May 2011 Special Issue PersPectives Political analysis and commentary from the Middle East PeoPle’s Power the arab world in revolt Published by the Heinrich Böll stiftung 2011 This work is licensed under the conditions of a Creative Commons license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/. You can download an electronic version online. You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work under the following conditions: Attribution - you must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work); Noncommercial - you may not use this work for commercial purposes; No Derivative Works - you may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. editor-in-chief: Layla Al-Zubaidi editors: Doreen Khoury, Anbara Abu-Ayyash, Joachim Paul Layout: Catherine Coetzer, c2designs, Cédric Hofstetter translators: Mona Abu-Rayyan, Joumana Seikaly, Word Gym Ltd. cover photograph: Gwenael Piaser Printed by: www.coloursps.com Additional editing, print edition: Sonya Knox Opinions expressed in articles are those of their authors, and not HBS. heinrich böll Foundation – Middle east The Heinrich Böll Foundation, associated with the German Green Party, is a legally autonomous and intellectually open political foundation. Our foremost task is civic education in Germany and abroad with the aim of promoting informed democratic opinion, socio-political commitment and mutual understanding. In addition, the Heinrich Böll Foundation supports artistic, cultural and scholarly projects, as well as cooperation in the development field. The political values of ecology, democracy, gender democracy, solidarity and non-violence are our chief points of reference.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation and the Myth of Consensus
    Essays Conservation and the Myth of Consensus M. NILS PETERSON,∗ MARKUS J. PETERSON,† AND TARLA RAI PETERSON‡ ∗Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, 13 Natural Resources Building, East Lansing, MI 48824-1222, U.S.A., email [email protected] †Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2258, U.S.A. ‡Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0491, U.S.A. Abstract: Environmental policy makers are embracing consensus-based approaches to environmental de- cision making in an attempt to enhance public participation in conservation and facilitate the potentially incompatible goals of environmental protection and economic growth. Although such approaches may pro- duce positive results in immediate spatial and temporal contexts and under some forms of governance, their overuse has potentially dangerous implications for conservation within many democratic societies. We suggest that environmental decision making rooted in consensus theory leads to the dilution of socially powerful con- servation metaphors and legitimizes current power relationships rooted in unsustainable social constructions of reality. We also suggest an argumentative model of environmental decision making rooted in ecology will facilitate progressive environmental policy by placing the environmental agenda on firmer epistemological ground and legitimizing challenges to current power hegemonies that dictate unsustainable practices. Key Words: democracy, environmental conflict,
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmopolitanism’ As an Analytic for the Comparative Study of Globalization and Education
    Rethinking ‘Cosmopolitanism’ as an Analytic for the Comparative Study of Globalization and Education Noah W. Sobe Loyola University Chicago This article proposes that for scholars in comparative and international education the study of “cosmpolitanisms” offers a productive avenue for thinking outside of the traditional paradigms of area studies and for understanding the new world-generating optics and multi-layered geographies that appear to be emerging with globalization. The piece explores the concept of “vernacular cosmopolitanisms” and discusses recent scholarship – on 21st century American education and on early-20th-century Yugoslav education – that have used cosmopolitanism as an analytic category. The article argues that studying actually, existing cosmopolitanisms is a useful strategy for examining the ways that solidarities are formed, identities are developed, and principles of inclusion and exclusion are elaborated amidst local and global assemblages. ne of the key analytic challenges that globalization presents is the need to develop social science research strategies appropriate to understanding emergent social, political and culturalO forms. In this article I argue that the study of cosmopolitanisms offers a productive avenue for thinking outside of the traditional paradigms of area studies and for understanding the new world-generating optics and multi-layered geographies that appear to be emerging with globalization. These new, often non-territorial configurations bring people, knowledge, institutions, and objects together
    [Show full text]
  • The Opposition to Israel's Withdrawal from the Gaza Strip: Legi
    1 ENGL 114 Professor Andrew Ehrgood The Opposition to Israel's Withdrawal from the Gaza Strip: Legitimizing Civil Disobedience from Both Sides of the Political Map by Aya Shoshan The Left Faces an Unexpected Dilemma As an Israeli leftist, I shared the left’s excitement when, in February 2004, Prime Minister Sharon announced his plan to withdraw from the Gaza strip. Even though this wasn't the peace agreement that the left craved for, no one could ignore the historical importance of this decision. The dominant view among the left was that after 38 years of occupation of Palestinian territories, Israel was finally acknowledging that the occupation was destructive. The withdrawal was also a precedent for evacuating other Israeli settlements. If the plan proved feasible, it would make way for other evacuations in the future. Finally, that the decision to withdraw had been made by a right-wing government meant that the understanding of the need to withdraw had crossed political boundaries and become a consensus. In the midst of this enthusiasm, disturbing voices of resistance appeared from the far right. Aside from expected protests against the withdrawal, some right-wing leaders and activists called for more severe steps, such as refusing to serve in the military and physically resisting the evacuation of settlements. These statements outraged the left. How dare the settlers, who have been nurtured by the state for years, who have taken pride in being patriotic and loyal to the state, who have dragged Israel into countless unnecessary confrontations with the Palestinians, how dare they turn their back on the law and the government now? There was an immense urge among the left to denounce the right resistance, and many left-wing activists and thinkers joined forces to do so.
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmopolitanism: Rethinking the Agenda of Education Abroad Brian Whalen1 & Michael Woolf 2
    Critical Essay Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad © 2020 Brian Whalen & Michael Woolf The work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Volume 32, Issue 3, pp. 72-98 DOI 10.36366/frontiers.v32i3.580 Cosmopolitanism: Rethinking the Agenda of Education Abroad Brian Whalen1 & Michael Woolf 2 Abstract Cosmopolitanism is an ambiguous and inherently paradoxical notion. Because of the complexities it raises, it generates analyses and discourses that challenge simplistic assumptions embedded in theory and practice of education abroad. Global citizenship, comprehensive internationalization, cultural relativity, immersion, cross-cultural learning, and community engagement are some of the concepts deconstructed through the lens of cosmopolitan ideas and histories. Cosmopolitan philosophies are also of particular and special relevance to student experience in international education. In short, cosmopolitanism is not one idea but a field of meaning, a cluster of profound propositions that might collectively enrich the curriculum of education abroad. Keywords: cosmopolitanism; history and philosophy; deconstructing the agenda; nationalism, cultural history Introduction: What is Cosmopolitanism? What is it not? Cosmopolitanism... is a philosophy and ethical orientation that takes account of the dense enmeshment of human beings - the connections 1 CAPA: THE GLOBAL EDUCATION NETWORK, LONDON, UK 2 AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL RECRUITMENT COUNCIL (AIRC), BETHESDA, MD, USA Corresponding author: Michael Woolf, CAPA: The Global Education Network, [email protected] Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 32(3) Whalen & Woolf between them, the bonds that link them, the interests that divide them, and the clashes of ethical and political outlook. Cosmopolitanism is a philosophy for the age of human interconnectedness, and generates a politics for a ‘small world’ (Brown & Held, 2010, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Smashing Cosmopolitanism: the Neo-Liberal Destruction of Cosmopolitan Education in East-Central Europe
    Smashing Cosmopolitanism: The Neo-liberal Destruction of Cosmopolitan Education in East-Central Europe Robert J. Imre University of Newcastle Zsuzsa Millei University of Newcastle Critiques that seek to examine cosmopolitanism as a concept suffer from a severe popularity problem. Rather than engage in this pro/con debate, we are interested in demonstrating that cosmopolitanism can wax and wane, ebb and flow, and has appeared as a grounding ideology for educational programs before, only to be torn asunder by those seeking to consolidate regime change. We do not suggest that cosmopolitanism is good and righteous politics, normatively opposed to or supporting patriotism, nor is it ideologically left, right or centre. We see a burgeoning cosmopolitan outlook in a particular time and place, that was smashed by political and social forces both unforeseen and powerful, changing foundational concepts of education in East-Central Europe in general and Hungary in particular. s a popular concept in the English-speaking world, cosmopolitanism conjures up notions of a well-read, well-fed, bourgeoisie with economic and social capacities to move around the worldA using their networks and sophisticated understandings of cultural diversity. A cosmopolitan understanding of the world encompasses a commitment to universal human rights, universal human potential, and a deeply embedded acceptance of difference and diversity. These ideas are core parts of a universalist frame of reference, and a philosophical underpinning of a particular view of the modern world held during the Industrial Revolution until today (Held, 2003). This paper challenges the idea that cosmopolitanism exists exclusively in the post-Cold War period in East-Central Europe, and also challenges the idea that the Hungarian education system was a monolithic neo-Stalinist version of ‘ideology expression’.
    [Show full text]
  • Virality : Contagion Theory in the Age of Networks / Tony D
    VIRALITY This page intentionally left blank VIRALITY TONY D. SAMPSON UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA PRESS Minneapolis London Portions of chapters 1 and 3 were previously published as “Error-Contagion: Network Hypnosis and Collective Culpability,” in Error: Glitch, Noise, and Jam in New Media Cultures, ed. Mark Nunes (New York: Continuum, 2011). Portions of chapters 4 and 5 were previously published as “Contagion Theory beyond the Microbe,” in C Theory: Journal of Theory, Technology, and Culture (January 2011), http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=675. Copyright 2012 by the Regents of the University of Minnesota All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Published by the University of Minnesota Press 111 Third Avenue South, Suite 290 Minneapolis, MN 55401-2520 http://www.upress.umn.edu Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sampson, Tony D. Virality : contagion theory in the age of networks / Tony D. Sampson. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8166-7004-8 (hc : alk. paper) ISBN 978-0-8166-7005-5 (pb : alk. paper) 1. Imitation. 2. Social interaction. 3. Crowds. 4. Tarde, Gabriel, 1843–1904. I. Title. BF357.S26 2012 302'.41—dc23 2012008201 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper The University of Minnesota is an equal-opportunity educator and employer. 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Dedicated to John Stanley Sampson (1960–1984) This page intentionally left blank Contents Introduction 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Clarifying the Structure and Nature of Left-Wing Authoritarianism
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology PREPRINT © 2021 American Psychological Association In press. Not the version of record. Final version DOI: 10.1037/pspp0000341 Clarifying the Structure and Nature of Left-wing Authoritarianism Thomas H. Costello, Shauna M. Bowes Sean T. Stevens Emory University New York University Foundation for Individual Rights in Education Irwin D. Waldman, Arber Tasimi Scott O. Lilienfeld Emory University Emory University University of Melbourne Authoritarianism has been the subject of scientific inquiry for nearly a century, yet the vast majority of authoritarianism research has focused on right-wing authoritarianism. In the present studies, we inves- tigate the nature, structure, and nomological network of left-wing authoritarianism (LWA), a construct famously known as “the Loch Ness Monster” of political psychology. We iteratively construct a meas- ure and data-driven conceptualization of LWA across six samples (N = 7,258) and conduct quantitative tests of LWA’s relations with over 60 authoritarianism-related variables. We find that LWA, right- wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation reflect a shared constellation of personality traits, cognitive features, beliefs, and motivational values that might be considered the “heart” of au- thoritarianism. Still, relative to right-wing authoritarians, left-wing authoritarians were lower in dog- matism and cognitive rigidity, higher in negative emotionality, and expressed stronger support for a political system with substantial centralized state control. Our results also indicate that LWA power- fully predicts behavioral aggression and is strongly correlated with participation in political violence. We conclude that a movement away from exclusively right-wing conceptualizations of authoritarian- ism may be required to illuminate authoritarianism’s central features, conceptual breadth, and psycho- logical appeal.
    [Show full text]
  • Popular Uprisings and Philippine Democracy
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UW Law Digital Commons (University of Washington) Washington International Law Journal Volume 15 Number 1 2-1-2006 It's All the Rage: Popular Uprisings and Philippine Democracy Dante B. Gatmaytan Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wilj Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation Dante B. Gatmaytan, It's All the Rage: Popular Uprisings and Philippine Democracy, 15 Pac. Rim L & Pol'y J. 1 (2006). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wilj/vol15/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at UW Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington International Law Journal by an authorized editor of UW Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Copyright © 2006 Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal Association IT’S ALL THE RAGE: POPULAR UPRISINGS AND PHILIPPINE DEMOCRACY † Dante B. Gatmaytan Abstract: Massive peaceful demonstrations ended the authoritarian regime of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines twenty years ago. The “people power” uprising was called a democratic revolution and inspired hopes that it would lead to the consolidation of democracy in the Philippines. When popular uprisings were later used to remove or threaten other leaders, people power was criticized as an assault on democratic institutions and was interpreted as a sign of the political immaturity of Filipinos. The literature on people power is presently marked by disagreement as to whether all popular uprisings should be considered part of the people power tradition.
    [Show full text]