Samenvatting Political Thought 2020-21

Introduction
Political thought= a compromise between political theory and political philosophy

Political philosophy= traditional name for the branch of philosophy that deals with politics

 Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Machiavelli, Grotius, Locke, Rousseau, …
 Traditional question: legitimation of authority and best political organisation
 Can there be a “best” political organisation?
o According to the “true” human nature?

Political theory= reaction to the (too) wide perspective of political philosophy

 After WWII: need for thinking what happened and perplexity of classical philosophy
 Hannah Arendt (among others) decided to call herself a political theorist
 Why?  Political theory …
o Is made by an individual in a definite social context
o Is context dependant: we ask different questions at different times
 Example: Arendt and the Holocaust, question of slavery, feminism, black lives
matter, …
o Bears political stakes: political theory is political (it makes an argument)

To sum up:

 Same object, but different perspectives
 Theoria (political philosophy) VS Praxis (political theory)
 Department of philosophy VS department of political science?
 Goal: make an argument in a definite social context VS understanding the political dimension
of being?

 Political thought= an englobing compromise referring to the corpus of writings on the political

 Active relation to this corpus
 Goal: an exercise of philosophy on the political
 Philosophy…
o As a set of beliefs
o As “boring” books
o As an activity of interrogation

 Intrinsically critical: why are things/representations as they are? The need to question
“evidence”




1

,How do we define “democracy”?

 Problem: this term is used in very different contexts

 As a descriptor
 As an indicator of political legitimacy: very strong link democracy – legitimacy
 As a decision-making model

 But the expectations are not the same at all levels

 We defend democracy in politics and accept tyranny in the workplace

 So how do we define “democracy”?

1. DEMOS-KRATOS

 Demos= the people
 Kratos= the force, the power
 Abraham Lincoln famous definition: “Government of the people, for the people, and by the
people”  remarks:
o On who can the people exercise the power other than themselves?
o The idea is that people A have power over people A, not people B
o “For the people”: obviously they wouldn’t govern over themselves in the interest of
another people
 Problem: once we have said that, we haven’t said anything  multiple questions left:
o Who is the demos?
 Only people with Belgian nationality
 No people under 18 years old
 For long: no women
 Why these restrictions?
o How does he use his authority?
 Delegates, representatives
o Over whom? The non-citizens? The non-humans? Children?
 Why do humans have the right to exercise power over animals, nature, … ?
 Right to destroy?
 Limit right to vote to a certain age? Exclude seniors from voting?
 Why is it important everybody can vote? Who is “everybody”?
o Why is he sovereign?
o Is it a good form of government?
o Can the majority impose its rule on minorities?

2. DEMOCRACY AS SOVEREING WILL?

 Democracy= regime in which the people decide of their laws (direct, indirect or referendum)
o Direct connection between what people want and laws
o Is this enough to define “democracy”?
 Is what people want right?  The question of limits and hubris
o Example: majority vote to ban religious freedom
o What about other liberties? Referendum SWTZ: question comes from the people
 General question: “Are there things that the sovereign people cannot do?”
o Is there an antidemocratic use of democratic power?


2

,3. DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

 Solution: add the guarantee of human rights and basic liberties

 Is this enough to define “democracy”?
o Example Classical England: king with vast powers but a bill of right (limited power)
o Republicans and neo-republicans: freedom as non-domination
o Another sense of the idea of people sovereignty: there is no authority superior to the
people who can veto one of his decisions

 It’s not enough to have rights and liberties, the idea of democracy also calls for a form of popular
sovereignty



PROVISIONAL DEFINITION

Democracy= sovereign power vested in people & individual liberties and human rights

 Negative and positive aspects
 What are the institutions of a democracy?
o Many different variations and conflicting democratic principles
o Direct democracy “more democratic” than indirect democracy?
o Consequences for electoral system? (US president election: popular vote vs winner)
o Referendum?

 To answer these questions, we need a definition of democracy

Accurate definition of democracy?

 Observation of actual regimes:
o “Actual democracies” aren’t necessarily labelled with the term
o Authoritarian regimes call themselves democratic
o Western democracies?

Democracy as a contested concept:

 Representative or indirect
 Partocratic (seems more oligarchic)
 Deliberative
 Participatory
 Direct
 Open
 …

(In)equality

 Wealth inequality (inheritance) vs income inequality
 Are all men really born equal?
 Merit vs luck (sometimes working hard doesn’t mean you get paid more)
 “Is inequality a problem for democracy?”
 What kind of equality matters for democracy? & Which inequalities threaten democracy?
o Equality  identity


3

, Kinds of (in)equality:

 RIGHTS
o In theory vs in practice
o Right to have rights  no nationality means no rights
o Right to defend rights  justice can be expensive (money, time)
 GENDER
o Equal pay  not yet
 MINORITIES
o Discrimination
 OPPORTUNITIES
o Should we all have the same opportunities?
 PRIVILEGES
o Blue blood doesn’t mean much now, but it used to
o Caste system India
 HONOUR
 ECONOMIC
o We underestimate the proportion of economic inequalities!
 Big difference between million and billion




o How to measure economic inequalities?
 Include debt?
 Actual vs virtual wealth?
o Income vs wealth
o Transmission of wealth: does inheritance fragment fortunes?
 Yes: intuitive evidence vs No: snowball effect
 Imagine you have a capital of 1000 euros and an average rate of 4%. Each
year you have 40 euros of dividend that you reinvest immediately.
 After 10 years: 1480.24 euros
 After 30 years: 3243 euros
 After 60 years: 10 519 euros
 Imagine you receive a million euros at age 18 and you die at age 78 (4%
interest rate)  10.5 million euros
 Corrections: inflation, spending, taxation




4