PART V - Towards a Post-Western World?
1. The third way
Alternative for contemporary malaise?
- With the optimism of the end of the Cold War, came new questions: Consequences of
globalisation? How do states sustain certain policies?
Giddens - The third way (socialist, academician) - 90s/After the end of the Cold War
- Beyond liberalism and socialism - politics that goes beyond the left and the right
- → not alternative system than capitalism
- Matter of facts (starting point - cannot oppose it):
- Globalisation (important, touching upon all aspects of society)
- Societies are becoming more and more diverse
- Individualisation (should be regulated/controlled but isn’t especially a danger)
- → find ways to combine these matters of facts
- SO, Dialogic democracy: wherein there is dialogue
- Autonomy (citizens have a clear voice) and solidarity (individuals think wider than for
themselves) principle
- → Result: the active welfare state
- = with the rights you get as a citizen, comes responsibility
- Multiculturalism (societies are diversifying and getting more complex)
- Vagueness of ideas (‘there’s no big idea’ - the Economics)
- Fits with different political traditions
- Spoke to popular parties at that time
2. The challenge of anti-racism: beyond apartheid
[not on the exam - !!! ]
3. 9/11 and its consequences: a new World?
Clash of civilizations, War of terror and (neo) liberal dreams
3.1. Multiculturalism
- Multiculturalism = concept with attached values/norms
- >< Multicultural = adjective describing reality: a fact, our societies have become more diversified
and different
, Two trends of thinking about multiculturalism: Liberals vs communitarians?
- Liberals assumed that human emancipation is only possible when an individual is fully free and
autonomous (no imposed values: cultural, religious, etc)
- Communitarians believe that an individual is always part of some (pre-defined) group/
community → we’re social animals
Charles Taylor (canadian philosopher)
- Recognition and respect of minority groups
- There’s always been people who associate themselves to a certain group and define
themselves on that basis (ethnic, religious, race, etc.)
- Mostly in today's Western society - diversity has become extremely complex
- SO, Power imbalance between majority and minority groups
- Politics of recognition (and of course, politics of redistribution)
- People must feel at home even if minority → they will connect themselves to the
greater whole
- Responsibility to engage with the rest of society
- Recognising certain rights to minority isn’t about giving them specific benefits (against
majority) but to balance disparities
Will Kymlicka (canadian sociologist)
- Collective group rights - different minority vs. majority
- National minorities >< immigrant groups (consequences of more recent waves of migration)
- BUT, How to create those rights (specific to groups) when law is individualised?
- → The demands of minorities:
- Right of internal restrictions
- = settling/discussing rules/issues without intervention of majority groups or
demanding/refusing things different from the majority such as a holiday
- Right to external protections
- = protect minority groups against impact of decisions from the rest of society
- Eg: french speaking minority in Montreal - how not to erase the culture
→ from of multiculturalism that is normal/natural to Kymlicka
- Canada = interesting case when it comes to multiculturalism
- (ancient) colony → autochthonous/indigenous vs. colonial
- How do these cohabit? What is each group’s place in society?
- + Language minority = french-speaking region of quebec
- Immigration questions at the core of society as well
1. The third way
Alternative for contemporary malaise?
- With the optimism of the end of the Cold War, came new questions: Consequences of
globalisation? How do states sustain certain policies?
Giddens - The third way (socialist, academician) - 90s/After the end of the Cold War
- Beyond liberalism and socialism - politics that goes beyond the left and the right
- → not alternative system than capitalism
- Matter of facts (starting point - cannot oppose it):
- Globalisation (important, touching upon all aspects of society)
- Societies are becoming more and more diverse
- Individualisation (should be regulated/controlled but isn’t especially a danger)
- → find ways to combine these matters of facts
- SO, Dialogic democracy: wherein there is dialogue
- Autonomy (citizens have a clear voice) and solidarity (individuals think wider than for
themselves) principle
- → Result: the active welfare state
- = with the rights you get as a citizen, comes responsibility
- Multiculturalism (societies are diversifying and getting more complex)
- Vagueness of ideas (‘there’s no big idea’ - the Economics)
- Fits with different political traditions
- Spoke to popular parties at that time
2. The challenge of anti-racism: beyond apartheid
[not on the exam - !!! ]
3. 9/11 and its consequences: a new World?
Clash of civilizations, War of terror and (neo) liberal dreams
3.1. Multiculturalism
- Multiculturalism = concept with attached values/norms
- >< Multicultural = adjective describing reality: a fact, our societies have become more diversified
and different
, Two trends of thinking about multiculturalism: Liberals vs communitarians?
- Liberals assumed that human emancipation is only possible when an individual is fully free and
autonomous (no imposed values: cultural, religious, etc)
- Communitarians believe that an individual is always part of some (pre-defined) group/
community → we’re social animals
Charles Taylor (canadian philosopher)
- Recognition and respect of minority groups
- There’s always been people who associate themselves to a certain group and define
themselves on that basis (ethnic, religious, race, etc.)
- Mostly in today's Western society - diversity has become extremely complex
- SO, Power imbalance between majority and minority groups
- Politics of recognition (and of course, politics of redistribution)
- People must feel at home even if minority → they will connect themselves to the
greater whole
- Responsibility to engage with the rest of society
- Recognising certain rights to minority isn’t about giving them specific benefits (against
majority) but to balance disparities
Will Kymlicka (canadian sociologist)
- Collective group rights - different minority vs. majority
- National minorities >< immigrant groups (consequences of more recent waves of migration)
- BUT, How to create those rights (specific to groups) when law is individualised?
- → The demands of minorities:
- Right of internal restrictions
- = settling/discussing rules/issues without intervention of majority groups or
demanding/refusing things different from the majority such as a holiday
- Right to external protections
- = protect minority groups against impact of decisions from the rest of society
- Eg: french speaking minority in Montreal - how not to erase the culture
→ from of multiculturalism that is normal/natural to Kymlicka
- Canada = interesting case when it comes to multiculturalism
- (ancient) colony → autochthonous/indigenous vs. colonial
- How do these cohabit? What is each group’s place in society?
- + Language minority = french-speaking region of quebec
- Immigration questions at the core of society as well
