DEMOCRACY AND DECISIONAL LIMITS

BOGDAN CONSTANTIN MIHAILESCU

Abstract


If the majority rule, as decisional instrument of legitimating the different resolutions intended for the public space and of revealing the demos sovereignty has - or has not – inaccessible decisional spheres, submitted to some philosophical, ideological or juridical restraints, is one of the important questions from the theory of democracy. A negative answer may be given on the line of encouraging direct democracy, of sustaining its specific demands and participative mechanisms, towards which cannot be accepted pre-imposed limits. At the same time, the analysis of the political practices may show that, although these practices seem to be subordinated to some restrictive frames, they remain attached, as regards the issues of maximal importance, to certain decisional wills, of majoritarian type. An affirmative answer may be formulated either by the help of some strategies of foundationalist kind, specific to classical liberal thought, or through the agency of an ethical-philosophical discourse of interpretative type. There is also the possibility to answer by the attempt of delegitimating the question and by arguing that the political practices are the fruit of the historical contingency, so that the preeminence of democracy towards the theory makes the research of some subjects useless.

Keywords


democracy, decision, majority, sovereignty

References


Ackerman, B. A. (1980). Social Justice in The Liberal State. New York: Yale University Press.

Ackerman, B.A. (2004). Political Liberalism. În Shaun P. Young (Ed.), Political Liberalism: Variations on a Theme, 79-102, New York: State University of New York Press.

Dahl, R. A. (1957). Decision Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy.

Maker. HeinOnline, 6 J. Pub. L. 279-295. Disponibil online: http://epstein.wustl.edu/research/courses.judpol.Dahl.pdf.

Dahl, R. A. (2004). Dezvoltare şi cultură democratică. În Larry Diamond, Yun-han Chu, Marc F. Plattner, Hung-mao Tien (Ed.), Cum se consolidează democraţia, 68-73, Iaşi: Polirom.

Dworkin, R. (1998). The Partenership Conception of Democracy. California Law Review, 86(3), 453-458.

Dworkin, R. (2013). Taking Rights Seriously. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

Hayek, F. A. (1998). Constituţia libertăţii. Iaşi: Institutul European.

Held, D. (2000). Modele ale democraţiei. Bucureşti: Univers.

Kelsen, H. (1967). Pure Theory of Law. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kelsen, H. (2007). General Theory of Law and State. New Jersey: Lawbook Exchange Ltd.

Lasswell, H.D. (2011). Politics: Who Gets What, When, How. MT/USA: Literary Licensing LLC.

Mihailescu, B.C. (2012). Decizie şi democraţie. În Ana Gugiuman (Ed.), Idei şi valori perene în ştiinţele socio-umane, XVII, 487-502, Cluj-Napoca: Argonaut.

Mihailescu, B. C. (2014). Decisionism, Postmodernism and International Relations. Romanian Journal of International Relations and European Studies (ROJIRES), II(1), 95-106.

Rorty, R. (1998). Contingenţă, ironie şi solidaritate. Bucureşti: ALL.

Rorty, R. (2000a). Prioritatea democraţiei în raport cu filosofia. În Richard Rorty, Obiectivitate, relativism şi adevăr. Eseuri filosofice 1, 311-343, Bucureşti: Univers.

Rorty, R. (2000b). Liberalismul burghez postmodern. În Richard Rorty, Obiectivitate, relativism şi adevăr. Eseuri filosofice 1, 344-352, Bucureşti: Univers.

Rorty, R. (2003). Drepturi umane, raţionalitate şi sentimentalism. În Richard Rorty, Adevăr şi progres. Eseuri filosofice III, 91-113, Bucureşti: Univers.

Rosenberg, G.N. (2001). Road Taken: Robert A. Dahl's Decision Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker. Emory Law Journal, 50, 613-630.

Rousseau, J.J. (2003). Contractul social. Filipeşti Prahova: ANTET.

Sartori, G. (1999). Teoria democraţiei reinterpretată. Iaşi: Polirom.

Stavropoulos, N. (2014). Legal Interpretivism. În The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Edward N. Zalta (Ed.), Disponibil online: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lawinterpretivist/#

Schmitt, C. (2005). Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Schmitt, C. (2008). Constitutional Theory. Durham: Duke University Press.

Schmitt, C. (2013). Dictatorship: From the Beginning of the Modern Concept of Sovereignty to the Proletarian Class-Struggle. Cambridge: Polity Press.

White, D. J. (2009). Decision Theory. Chicago: Aldine Transaction – Transaction Publishers.

Young, I.M. (2002). Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.