School of Political Science and
International Relations
CASS
Australian National University
ANU CRICOS Provider No. 00120C
CONTEMPORARY
POLITICAL THEORY (POLS2063)
Second Semester, 2012
David West
1. Course Description.
2. Lecture Programme.
3. Tutorial Programme.
4. Lecture Outlines.
5. Essays.
6. Departmental Rules.
7. Reading List
8. Useful Information.
9. Useful Web Links
10. Second Assignment - will be available via this link from Thursday
10th June at 9am and is due on Thursday 17th June at 4pm.
GO TO David West's Home Page .
Political theory has been revived,
in recent years, by a series of ambitious and systematic works. This unit will
examine such influential figures as Rawls, Nozick, Walzer, Oakeshott, Kymlicka
and Okin. We shall examine their accounts of basic political values and their
visions of the _good society' _ addressing such questions as the nature of
justice and a just distribution of wealth, the value of equality, freedom or
liberty, rights and duties of citizenship and civic virtue. Communitarian,
multicultural and feminist critiques of liberal democracy will be considered as
well as the relationship between political values and political action. The aim
of this course is to develop both critical thinking and skills in discussion
and argument, and familiarity with key concepts and thinkers in contemporary
political theory.
LEARNING RESOURCES, PRESCRIBED TEXT
AND READINGS
Textbook:Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn (Oxford University Press,
Oxford and New York , 2002) _ available from Co-op Bookshop.
Reading Brick :Contemporary Political Theory,
Additional Readings (details to be advised).
MODE OF DELIVERY AND WORKLOAD
The course will be delivered by 2
Weekly Lectures (recorded to Wattle and 1 Weekly Tutorial (3 contact hours in
total). In addition students should expect to work outside class time for about
7 hours per week on Tutorial Readings and the completion of two written
assignments (details below).
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT
One 2,250 word essay and a second
take-home written assignment, each contributing 45% to the final mark. In
addition 10% of the final mark will be given for tutorial participation. NB.
Only students who have both submitted an essay and attended at least 7 of 10
Tutorials will be eligible to submit the second assignment and so complete the
course.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After successful completion of this
course, students should be able to:
1. Demonstrate knowledge of the
major debates and concepts in contemporary political theory/ philosophy.
2. Demonstrate knowledge of the
ideas and arguments of one or more major contemporary political philosophers.
GENERIC SKILLS DEVELOPED BY THIS
COURSE
This course will develop generic
skills in critical thinking, written communication (writing and reading
skills), oral communication (presentation and discussion) and academic research
methods.
Return to Contents.
COURSE SCHEDULE PART A.
LECTURE PROGRAMME
|
Lecture
Times |
Mon
2.00 pm |
HA
Tank |
|
|
Wed
1.00 pm |
MCC
T5 |
A brief outline of each week_s topic
will be handed out at the lectures and will be available here after Monday's
lecture each week. The handout provides only a brief outline of each
week_s lectures and is not a substitute for attendance at lectures or your own
notes. Lectures will also be recorded/ streamed via Wattle.
Week One (w/b 22 nd February)
Lecture 1. Introduction and Overview
of the Course.
Lecture 2. What is Political Theory?
Between Realism and Idealism I.
Week Two (w/b 1 st March)
Lecture 1. What is Political Theory?
Between Realism and Idealism II.
Lecture 2. Conservatism vs.
Ideologies of Progress I.
Week Three (w/b 8 th March)
Lecture 1. Public Holiday _ Monday 8
th March _ Canberra Day: No Lecture
Lecture 2. Conservatism vs. Ideologies
of Progress II.
Week Four (w/b 15 th March)
Lectures 1-2. Utilitarianism,
Welfare and the Dominance of Economics.
Week Five (w/b 22 nd March)
Lectures 1-2. Liberalism: John
Rawls's Theory of
Justice , Part I.
Week Six (w/b 29 th March)
Lectures 1-2. Liberalism: John
Rawls's Theory of
Justice , Part II.
Mid-semester Break : 2 nd April _ 18
th April
Week Seven (w/b 19 th April)
Lectures 1-2. Libertarianism:
Nozick, Human Rights and the Minimal State.
Week Eight (w/b 26 th April)
Public Holiday _ Monday 26 th April
_ Anzac Day
Essay Completion: No Lectures and No Tutorials.
First Assignment Due on Thursday 29
th April at 4 pm
Week Nine (w/b 3 rd May)
Lectures 1-2. Communitarianism:
Michael Walzer.
Week Ten (w/b 10 th May)
Lectures 1-2. Multiculturalism and
Cultural Rights: Will Kymlicka.
Week Eleven (w/b 17 th May)
Lectures 1-2. Contemporary Feminist
Theory.
Week Twelve (w/b 24 th May)
Lectures 1-2. Republicanism:
Citizenship, Responsibility and Political Action: Hannah Arendt.
Week Thirteen (w/b 31 st May)
Lecture 1. Conclusion and Review of
the Course.
Lecture 2. No lecture.
Second Assignment Available online
from Thursday 10 th June at 9am
Second Assignment Due on thursday 17
th June at 4pm
Return to Contents.
COURSE SCHEDULE
PART B. TUTORIAL PROGRAMME (10% of Final Mark)
Enrolment in Tutorials is via Wattle
(from the First Week of Semester). Tutorials will be held from the Second
Week of Semester. Tutorials are an essential
part of the course. 10% of the final assessment is based on
Tutorial participation.
N.B. Only students who both submit a
first assignment and attend at least 7 out of 10 Tutorials will be eligible to
complete the final assessment for this course.
Essential readings for each tutorial (marked with *
) are either from:
(a) Textbook: Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn (Oxford University Press,
Oxford and New York , 2002) _ available from Co-op Bookshop.
(b) Reading Brick, Contemporary
Political Theory: Additional Readings (details to be confirmed).
Further Readings : some suggestions for further reading
on each topic are indicated below. Further readings are not required reading
for the tutorial. Other references can be obtained from the textbook and the
Reading List below.
Tutorial questions are listed below and may refer to
both the essential readings for each week's tutorial and material discussed in
lectures. These tutorial questions are intended to stimulate discussion in
addition to your tutor's suggestions for tutorial discussion.
Week One (w/b 22 nd February)
No tutorial.
Week Two (w/b 1 st March)
Introduction and Overview. What is
Political Theory? Between Realism and Idealism.
1. An opportunity to discuss the
course as a whole, assessment, organisation etc. Any questions? 2. What is
political theory? What are political values (as opposed to facts)? How can we
argue for, or justify our political values?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn, Introduction.
Further Reading
Okin, S. M.: Justice, Gender,
and the Family , Ch. 1.
Barry, Norman P.: An
Introduction to Modern Political Theory , 3rd ed., Introduction,
pp. 3-15.
MacCallum, Gerald C.: Political
Philosophy , Introduction, pp. 1-5.
Week Three (w/b 8 th March)
Public Holiday _ Monday 8 th March _
Canberra Day
Conservatism vs. Ideologies of
Progress .
How do contemporary ideologies
relate to the Enlightenment? What does Oakeshott mean by rationalism in
politics? What are the dangers or rationalism? What does Oakeshott see as the
role of tradition? Does the commitment to tradition imply conservatism? 3. Is
radical politics dangerous?
Essential Reading
*Oakeshott, M. (1962): _Rationalism
in politics' in Rationalism in Politics , ( Methuen , London ), pp.
1-36.
Further Reading
Gray, J: Enlightenment's Wake:
Politics and Culture at the Close of the Modern Age .
Franco, P.: The Political
Philosophy of Michael Oakeshott , esp. Ch. 4, _Rationalism'.
Week Four (w/b 15 th March)
Utilitarianism, Welfare and the
Dominance of Economics.
What is utilitarianism (U)? Why does
U claim to be a rational political philosophy? What are some common criticisms
of U? What are the radical implications of U? How can you argue for a more
conservative interpretation of U?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 2,
_Utilitarianism'.
*Singer, P.: Practical Ethics ,
Ch. 8, _Rich and Poor', pp. 158-81.
Further Reading
Jones, C.: Global Justice:
Defending cosmopolitanism , esp. Ch. 2 _Utilitarianism and Global
Justice', pp. 23-49 (Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 1999).
Goodin, R. E : Utilitarianism as
a Public Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York,
1995).
Williams, B. & Smart, J.J.C.: Utilitarianism:
For and against (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973).
Week Five (w/b 22 nd March)
Liberalism: John Rawls's Theory of Justice , Part I.
Why does Rawls reject democratic
majoritarianism? Why does Rawls reject utilitarianism? How does Rawls argue for
his conception of justice? What is the original position? Who are the
participants in the original position? How do they argue for Rawls's conception
of _justice as fairness'?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 3, _Liberal
Equality', Sections. 1-3.
*Rawls, J.: A Theory of Justice
, Ch. 1, Sections 1-4, pp. 3-22.
Further Reading
Kukathas, C. & Pettit, P.: Rawls:
A Theory of Justice and its Critics (Polity Press, Cambridge, 1990), esp.
Chs. 1-2, pp. 1-35.
Brown, A.: Modern Political
Philosophy (Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1986), Ch. 3.
Week Six (w/b 29 th March)
Liberalism: John Rawls's Theory of Justice , Part II.
What are Rawls's two principles
justice? What is the significance of the _priority of liberty'? What are
_primary goods'? How are primary goods to be distributed according to the
_difference principle'? Why do some critics regard Rawls as too egalitarian?
Why do some critics think he is not egalitarian enough?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 3, _Liberal
Equality', Sections. 4-5.
*Rawls, J.: A Theory of Justice
, Ch. 1, 5-9, pp. 22-53.
Further Reading
Kukathas, C. and Pettit, P.: Rawls:
A Theory of Justice and its Critics (Polity Press, Cambridge, 1990), Chs.
3-4, pp. 37-73.
Daniels, Norman , ed.: Reading
Rawls: Critical Studies on Rawls' _A Theory of Justice' (Stanford
University Press, Stanford, CA, 1989).
Brown, A.: Modern Political
Philosophy (Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1986), Ch. 3.
Mid-semester Break : 2 nd April _ 18
th April
Week Seven (w/b 19 th April)
Libertarianism: Nozick, Human Rights
and the Minimal State.
What, according to Nozick, are
natural rights? What natural rights does he think we have? What is the minimal
state? Why does Nozick think that nothing more than a minimal state is
justified? What is the difference between (Rawls's) liberalism and (Nozick's)
libertarianism?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 4, _Libertarianism'.
*Nozick, R.: _Moral Constraints and
Distributive Justice', pp. 100-22 (extract from R. Nozick, Anarchy, State,
and Utopia , Part I, Ch. 3, pp. 26-53).
Further Reading
Okin, S. M.: Justice, Gender,
and the Family , Ch. 4, _Libertarianism: Matriarchy, Slavery and
Dystopia'.
Pettit, P.: Judging Justice ,
Chs. 8-10, pp. 75-103.
Brown, A. Modern Political
Philosophy , Ch. 4, _Robert Nozick and the Entitlement Theory of Justice'.
Week Eight (w/b 26 th April)
Public Holiday _ Monday 26 th April
_ Anzac Day
Essay Completion: No Lectures and No Tutorials.
First Assignment Due on Thursday 29
th April at 4 pm
Week Nine (w/b 3 rd May)
Communitarianism: Michael Walzer.
Is justice always the same
everywhere or does it depend on your society, culture or community? Why does
Walzer describe his theory as _pluralist'? What does Walzer mean by _dominance'
and _monopoly' of goods? What is the difference between _simple' and _complex'
equality?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 6.
*Walzer, M.: Spheres of Justice (Blackwell,
Oxford, 1983), Ch. 1, _Complex Equality', pp. 3-30..
Further Reading
Mulhall, S. & Swift, A., Liberals
and Communitarians (Blackwell, Oxford, 1992), Ch. 4.
Okin, S. M.: Justice, Gender,
and the Family , Ch. 3, _Whose Traditions? Which Understandings', pp.
& Ch. 6, _Justice from Sphere to Sphere: Challenging the Public/Domestic
Dichotomy'.
Kymlicka, W.: Liberalism,
Community and Culture , Ch. 11, _Walzer and Minority Rights'.
Shapiro, I.: Political Criticism
, Ch. 3.
Week Ten (w/b 10 th May)
Multiculturalism and Cultural
Rights: Will Kymlicka.
Are liberal rights enough to
guarantee justice for ethnic and religious minorities? What rights should
indigenous peoples have? Are group or community rights compatible with
individual liberal rights? What are some issues where these kinds of rights
might come into conflict?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 8,
_Multiculturalism'.
Further Reading
Kymlicka, W., ed.: The Rights of
Minority Cultures (Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 1995) (a
useful collection of articles).
West, D.: _Beyond Social Justice and
Social Democracy: Positive Freedom and Cultural Rights' in Boucher, D. &
Kelly, P., eds, Social Justice from Hume to Walzer (Routledge, London
and New York, 1998).
Week Eleven (w/b 17 th May)
Contemporary Feminist Theory.
In what ways does/did liberalism
disadvantage women? Should the aim of women be _difference' or _equality'.
According to Okin, what aspects of Rawls's theory of justice disadvantage
women? How does Okin propose to revise Rawls's theory of justice in order to
take account of gender and the family? Are Okin's suggested revisions enough to
guarantee justice for women?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 9, _Feminism'.
*Okin, S M.: Justice, Gender,
and the Family , Ch. 5, pp. 89-109.
*Nussbaum, M.: _Justice for women!',
Review of Justice, Gender, and the Family in New York Review of
Books , Oct. 8, 1992, pp. 43-8.
Further Reading
Okin, S. M.: _Reason and feeling in
thinking about justice' in Ethics 99, January 1989.
Gilligan, C.: In a Different
Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development (Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, MA, 1982).
Pateman, C.: The Sexual Contract
(Polity Press, Cambridge, 1988).
Week Twelve (w/b 24 th May)
Republicanism: Citizenship,
Responsibility and Political Action: Hannah Arendt.
What are the duties of citizenship?
What are civic virtues are necessary for a healthy liberal democracy? How can
civic virtues be encouraged? Is freedom essentially freedom from politics? Or
does freedom involve political participation and responsibility?
Essential Reading
*Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2 nd Edn , Ch. 7, _Citizenship
Theory'.
*Arendt, H.: _What is Freedom?' in Between
Past and Future (Penguin, London and New York, 1993), pp. 143-71.
Further Reading
Skinner, Q.: _The idea of negative
liberty: philosophical and historical perspectives' in R. Rorty et al., Philosophy
in History (Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, 1984).
B. Crick, _Freedom as Politics' in Political
Theory and Practice (Allen Lane, London, 1971), pp. 35-62.
Pettit, P.: Republicanism (Clarendon
Press, Oxford, 1997).
Week Thirteen (w/b 31 st May)
Conclusion and Review of the Course.
Return of First Assignment Essays. Guidelines on Second Assignment
An opportunity for general
discussion and revision. What have you learned from the course? What else would
you like to have discussed? Any last questions about any of the previous weeks'
topics? Any questions about the Second Assignment?
Second Assignment _ Available
Thursday 10 th June
Second Assignment _ Due thursday 17
th June at 4pm
Return to Contents.
LECTURE OUTLINES
Lecture outlines will be posted here after Monday's lecture each week.
Week 1. What is Political
Theory? Between Realism and Idealism.
Week
2. Conservatism: Michael Oakeshott Against Rationalism in Politics.
Week
3. Utilitarianism, Welfare and the Dominance of Economics
Week
4. Liberalism: John Rawls's Theory of Justice _ Part I. Justice as Fairness
Week
5. Liberalism: John Rawls's theory of Justice - Part II. The Two Principles of
Justice
Weeks
6-7. Libertarianism: Nozick, Human Rights and the Minimal State.
Week 8. No Lectures
Weeks 9-10.
Communitarianism. Michael Walzer's Spheres of Justice. Multiculturalism.
Week
11. Contemporary Feminist Theory and Lecture
Notes for Feminist Theory
Week 12. Republicanism: Citizenship,
Responsibility and Hannah Arendt.
Return to Contents.
COURSE SCHEDULE PART C. WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS (90% of
Final Mark)
This assignment addresses Learning
Outcomes 1-2 (see above).
First Assignment Due on Thursday 29
th April at 4 pm
IMPORTANT GUIDELINES _ PLEASE READ!
Suggested essay topics and readings
are listed below. If you would like to write on a different topic
within the overall subject matter of the Course, you must get approval of your
proposed topic from me in advance.
• Essays must be
produced on a word processor. Please print _double-sided' to save
paper. And remember to use a spelling checker to eliminate at
least some unnecessary errors! But remember, spelling checkers don't find all
mistake. You may be asked to submit an electronic copy of your essay in
addition to the hard copy you hand in to the Essay Box.
• Use only published
academic sources (i.e. books and journal articles) for this essay. If
there is no alternative, you may use online versions of published books and
journals _ but always include page references . For this
course, it is definitely not a good idea to rely on other
internet resources (freelance web-sites, blogs etc.).
• It might helpful to consult
a dictionary, but it is not a good idea to cite dictionaries
or other reference books or sites (such as encylopaedias, Wikipedia etc.) in
your essay.
• It is important to draw on a
reasonable range of sources (perhaps 5-10 sources approximately). But it is
more important that you read carefully and understand the
ideas discussed in those sources. Don't list items that you don't reference!
• Essays must have clearly and
consistently set out footnotes or end-notes and a bibliography of referenced
sources. Consult the PSIR Essay Writing Guide for appropriate
ways of referencing. You must include full bibliographical details including
author, title, date, journal or publisher, location and, above all, page
numbers .
• Originality and creativity
are valuable, but you should first show that you understand some of the
existing literature on your topic. If you ignore the work of people who have
thought about the topic before you, you are very unlikely to produce a good
essay.
• The best essays are critical
of the ideas and arguments they discuss.
• Think about the
question . Make sure you answer all the parts of the question.
• Make a draft plan of
your essay to work out how you will go about answering the question. Go back to
the plan during your research and writing to see how your essay is going, but
you may be able to improve the organisation of your ideas as your research and
essay-writing proceeds.
• Essays should be concise,
clearly expressed and logically structured .
• Presentation is
also important. You can improve the impression your essay makes by presenting
it well, including reasonable font size and print quality, good layout and
paragraphing.
• Plan ahead and
leave time after your first draft for some thinking time, a second draft and
careful final proof-reading and editing . You will be able to
improve your essay a lot.
• Your essay should be about
2,250 words in length. Essays that are substantially shorter or longer (more
than +/-10%) will be penalised according to CASS rules. You must indicate
your essay's precise word count on the cover sheet. Hint _ use
the Word Count function on the Tools menu of
your word processor.
TOPICS FOR FIRST ASSIGNMENT
Choose one topic from
the list below. If you would like to write an essay on a different topic, you
should get approval in advance for your proposed topic from your Tutor .
1. Discuss John Gray's version of
conservatism. Are there any problems with his ideas?
2. Discuss Oakeshott's criticisms of
rationalism in politics. Are his criticisms convincing?
3. How does Nozick justify the
_minimal state'. Why does he reject anything beyond a minimal state. Are his
arguments convincing?
4. How does Rawls justify his theory
of justice? Are his arguments convincing?
5. Discuss Rawls's two principles of
justice. Do they amount to an adequate theory of justice? Are there any
problems with Rawls's principles of justice?
6. What are Okin's criticisms of
Rawls's theory of justice? What are her suggested revisions of his theory? Are
her proposed revisions adequate?
7. Is preventing discrimination on
the basis of gender enough to ensure justice for women? If not, what else is
required? Discuss in relation to contemporary or recent feminist theorists.
8. Discuss Michael Walzer's account
of justice in Spheres of Justice . Are there any problems with
Walzer's account of justice?
9. Why do communitarians criticise
liberalism? Are their criticisms convincing? Can liberalism be modified to take
account of their criticisms?
10. Discuss Hannah Arendt's
_republican' conception of freedom. Do you agree that freedom depends on
political participation? Or do you think that freedom should also mean the
freedom not to participate in politics?
11. Discuss Quentin Skinner's
conception of freedom. Are there any problems with his conception?
12. Discuss theories of citizenship.
Why is citizenship important to political theory.
13. What are the main implications
of utilitarianism as a public philosophy ? Are there any problems with
utilitarian political theory?
SECOND ASSIGNMENT _ TAKE-HOME
EXAMINATION (Two Short Essays) _ 45% OF FINAL MARK
Second Assignment Available online here
from Thursday 10th June at 9am AND Due on Thursday 17th June at 4pm
The Second Assignment will consist
of two short essays (max. 800 words per essay/ 1600 words in total +/- 10%) . The Second Assignment addresses
Learning Outcomes 1-2 (see above). The Second Assignment will be available on
the web at http://arts.anu.edu.au/sss/west/cpt.html
. Papers should be handed in to the School Office Essay Box no later than
the due date (above). Please note that the second assignment is treated as an
examination, so marked scripts are not returned with comments.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA for WRITTEN assignments
Your work will be judged on:
• Adequate reading and
research - Are you aware of the main contributions other people have
made to this topic? Have you referred to these contributions where relevant
throughout your essay? Are you aware of the main points for and against your
point of view?
• Clear, consistent
and logically developed argument - Have you thought about the topic?
Do you understand the main ideas and the way they relate to each other? Do you
have a clear point of view? Is your point of view developed consistently and
logically throughout your essay? Are your paragraphs in the right order? Are your
sentences in the right order?
• Clear expression of
ideas and use of language - Is it easy for someone else to understand
what you have written? Is the meaning of your individual points clear and
unambiguous? Have you used language in a grammatical way? Do you use words
correctly?
• Good presentation -
Is your essay clearly laid out with reasonably sized and recognisable
paragraphs? Is the essay printed clearly in a reasonable font size (neither too
big nor too small)? Have you run a spelling-checker to eliminate some
unnecessary errors? Have you left time for a careful last edit and
proof-reading?
Return to Contents.
DEPARTMENTAL RULES ON ESSAY SUBMISSION, EXTENSIONS,
PLAGIARISM AND PENALTIES
For ANU policy and procedures
regarding ACADEMIC HONESTY, PLAGIARISM AND APPEALS , please
visit http://cass.anu.edu.au/students/rules/index.php
SUBMISSION OF FIRST ASSIGNMENT
_ ESSAY
1. Once essays on a particular topic
have been returned to students, no further essays on that topic will be
accepted.
2. All essays submitted by the due
date will be assessed and returned before the examination/ second assignment.
3. No essays will be accepted after
the commencement of the examination/ second assignment in a course unless
permission is secured on _medical or other reasonable grounds'.
PENALTIES AND EXTENSIONS
In fairness to students who meet the
deadline, a penalty will be imposed on all essays submitted
after the due date or later than an approved extension of the due date. The
penalty is two percentage points (2%) subtracted from the assessed mark (out of
100%) for the essay, for each calendar day (or part thereof) excluding weekends
by which the essay is overdue.
Extensions may be granted on medical or other
reasonable grounds. Students seeking an extension must discuss their request
with me before the due date. Please let me know as soon as possible if you are
experiencing any problems that may affect your studies. Extensions may be
granted on medical or other reasonable grounds.
Please note the following
guidelines:
1. Medical reasons -requests for extensions must be supported by
a medical certificate.
2. Personal problems _ requests for extensions should be
supported by some documentation such as a letter from your doctor, college
tutor, parent or other appropriate individual. If you have been seeing a
counsellor from the University Counselling Service, s/he may be able to write a
letter in support of your request _ but please note that you should not
see a counsellor merely in order to obtain such a letter .
3. Clash of essay deadlines - extensions will not normally be
given where a clash of essay deadlines is known in advance.
4. Outside employment - extensions will not normally be given
where external work commitments are known in advance. Requests for extensions
must be supported by a letter from your employer.
5. Participation in sporting events - requests for extensions
must be supported by a letter from the appropriate sporting body.
Return to Contents.
READING LIST
-
SOME SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING
The most useful single text for this
unit is Will Kymlicka, Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction , 2
nd Edn ( Oxford University Press, Oxford , 2001) . This book is
available from the University Co-op Bookshop and you should buy it. It provides
a useful background for many of the lectures and tutorials in the course as
well as extensive suggestions for further reading. The following reading list
covers the major areas of the unit and supplements suggested tutorial readings.
You can also access and search an online bibliography at the website for this unit.
Some useful works covering broad
areas of contemporary political theory are:
Barry, N. P.: An Introduction to
Modern Political Theory (3rd ed.).
Benn, S. & R. Peters: Social
Principles and the Democratic State
Brown, Alan: Modern Political
Philosophy
Clohesy, Anthony M., Isaacs, S.
& Sparks, C.: Contemporary Political Theorists in Context (Routledge,
London and New York , 2009).
Heywood, Andrew : Political
Ideas and Concepts: An introduction (2nd ed., 1999).
Knowles, Dudley: Political
Philosophy (Routledge, London and New York , 2001).
MacCallum, G. C.: Political
Philosophy .
McKinnon, C.: Issues in
Political Theory ( Oxford University Press, 2008).
Okin, Susan : Justice, Gender,
and the Family
Pettit, Philip: Judging Justice
Phillips, D. L.: Toward a Just
Social Order , esp. Part I.
Raphael, D. D. : Problems of
Political Philosophy .
Smits, Katherine: Applying
Political Theory: Issues and Debates (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke and
New York , 2009).
Wolff, Jonathan: An Introduction
to Political Philosophy (Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York,
1996).
Political philosophers who have
produced major or influential works which are relevant to many aspects of the
course:
John Rawls: A Theory of Justice (liberalism)
Robert Nozick: Anarchy, State
and Utopia (libertarian)
Michael Walzer: Spheres of
Justice (communitarian)
Peter Singer: Practical Ethics (utilitarian)
R. M. Dworkin: Taking Rights
Seriously (liberalism, rights, law)
Michael Oakeshott: Rationalism
in Politics (conservatism)
Useful Readers/ Compilations of
Extracts from Political Philosophers:]
Bronner, Stephen Eric, ed.: Twentieth
Century Political Theory: A Reader , 2 nd Edn (Routledge, London and New
York , 2006).
Kymlicka, Will: Justice in
Political Philosophy , 2 Vols (E. Elgar, Aldershot, 1992).
Rosen, Michael and Wolff, Jonathan,
eds: Political Thought (Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York,
1999).
Sterba, James P., ed.: Social
and Political Philosophy: Classical Western Texts in Feminist and Multicultural
Perspectives (Wadsworth, Albany, NY and London, 1998).
I. What is political philosophy?
Facts and values
Raphael, D. D. : Problems of
Political Philosophy , Ch. 1.
Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary
Political Philosophy , Introduction.
C. Taylor: 'Neutrality in political
science' in A. Ryan (ed.) The Philosophy of Social Explanation
A. MacIntyre: 'Ideology, social
science and revolution' in Comparative Politics , Vol. 3, 1973
A. MacIntyre: 'Is a science of
comparative politics possible?' in Ryan, op. cit.
Gunther & Reshauer: 'Science and
values in political science' in Phil. of Social Science , 1, 1971
J. Habermas: Theory and Practice
, esp. Intro. & Chs. 1 & 6
Critical theory
R. Keat: The Politics of Social
Theory
R.J. Bernstein: Restructuring
Social and Political Theory
M. Jay: The Dialectical
Imagination (a history of the Frankfurt School )
D. Held: Introduction to
Critical Theory
W. C. Gay & P. Eckstein:
'Bibliographical guide to hermeneutics and critical theory', Cultural Hermeneutics
2, 1975
A. Wellmer: Critical Theory
H. Marcuse: Negations esp.
'Philosophy and critical theory'
Utopian thought
F. Engels: _Socialism: utopian and
scientific' in, for example, Essential Works of Marxism , ed. A. P.
Mendel, Bantam, 1961
B. Goodwin: Social Science and
Utopia , Harvester, 1978
Goodwin, B. & Taylor, K.: The
Politics of Utopia (London, Hutchinson, 1982).
Habermas J.: Theory and Practice
, Introduction and Ch. 6.
Hudson , W: The Marxist
Philosophy of Ernst Bloch , 1982.
K. Kumar: Utopia and Anti-Utopia
in Modern Times
Kumar, K: Utopianism (Minneapolis,
Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1991)
Lukes, S.: Marxism and Morality ,
pp. 36-47
Manuel, F. E. (ed.): Utopias and
Utopian Thought (Boston & Cambridge, 1966)
F. E. Manuel and F. P. Manuel: Utopian
Thought in the Western World .
Marcuse, H.: _Philosophy and
critical theory' in Negations .
J. Passmore: The Perfectibility
of Man
K. Popper: The Poverty of
Historicism
II. The New Right
The 'conservative' strand
Barry, B.: Political Argument ,
pp. 54-8.
R. Scruton: The Meaning of
Conservatism
A. Ryan: Article on Scruton in G. A.
Cohen, et. al., The New Right
M. Oakeshott: Rationalism in
Politics , esp. 'Political education' and _Rationalism in politics'
W. H. Greenleaf: The
Philosophical Politics of M. Oakeshott
B. Crick: 'The world of Michael
Oakeshott', Encounter , 20, 1963
C. Falck: 'Romanticism in politics',
New Left Review , 1963
Franco, P.: The Political
Philosophy of Michael Oakeshott .
D. D. Raphael: 'Professor
Oakeshott's Rationalism in Politics' in Political Studies , 12, 1964
The 'libertarian' strand
F. A. Hayek: 'Equality, value and
merit' in M. Sandel, ed. Liberalism and its Critics
F. A. Hayek: The Constitution of
Liberty
F. A. Hayek: Studies in Philosophy,
Politics and Economics
F. A. Hayek: New Studies in
Philosophy, Politics, Economics and the History of Ideas
Kukathas, Chandran: Hayek and
Modern Liberalism.
J. C. Rees: 'Hayek on Liberty ' in Philosophy
, 38, 1963
M. M. Wilhelm: 'The political
thought of F. A. Hayek' in Political Studies , 20, 1972
J. Gray: Hayek on Liberty ,
1984.
Eamon Butler: Hayek , 1963
Norman Barry: Hayek's Social and
Economic Philosophy
N. Bosanquet: After the New
Right
A. de Crespigny: 'Hayek' in
Crespigny, ed., Contemporary Political Philosophy
I. Kristol: Two Cheers for
Capitalism (critical of Hayek from a conservative point of view)
R. Plant: Equality, Markets and
the State
J. R. Lucas: On Justice
Robert Nozick
R. Nozick: Anarchy, State and
Utopia
R. Nozick: _Distributive justice',
in Philosophy and Public Affairs , 3, 1973 and in J. Arthur and W. H.
Shaw, eds Justice and Economic Distribution
J. Paul, ed.: Reading Nozick
P. Pettit: Judging Justice ,
Pt. III
R. M. Hare: Moral Thinking , Ch.
9
O. O'Neill: 'Nozick's
entitlements?', Inquiry , 1976
M. Davis : 'Necessity and Nozick's
theory of entitlement', Political Theory , 1977
A. Goldman: 'The entitlement theory
of distributive justice', J of Philosophy , 1976
W. Runciman: 'Processes, end-states
and social justice', Phil. Quart . , 1978
M. Goldsmith: 'The entitlement
theory of justice considered', Political Studies , 1979
On the New Right in general
S. Hall & M. Jacques: The
Politics of Thatcherism (useful collection of articles)
D. Edgar: 'Bitter Harvest' in New
Socialist , 13, Sept./Oct. 1983 (on right wing pressure groups)
D. Edgar: _Reagan's hidden agenda', Race
and Class , winter, 1981
P. Foot: The Rise of Enoch
Powell
R. Levitas, ed.: The Ideology of
the New Right
D. G. Green: The New Right
N. Bosanquet: After the New
Right
B. Jessop et al.: 'Authoritarian
populism', NLR , 147, 1984
W. Keegan: Mrs Thatcher's
Economic Experiment
R. Behrens: The Conservative
Party from Heath to Thatcher
G. H. Nash: The Conservative
Intellectual Movement in America since 1945
M. W. Miles: The Odyssey of the
American Right
M. P. Barry: The New Right
D. S. King: The New Right
A. Gamble: The Free Economy and
the Strong State
G. A. Cohen et al: The New Right
(very brief)
Ashford, Nigel and Davies, Stephen: A
Dictionary of Conservative and Libertarian Thought (London and New York,
Routledge, 1991)
III. Restating Liberalism
General works on liberalism
R. P. Wolff: The Poverty of
Liberalism
R. Eccleshall et al.: Political
Ideologies
C. B. Macpherson: The Life and Times
of Liberal Democracy
R. Eccleshall, ed.: British
Liberalism: 1640s - 1980s
J. Acton: The History of Freedom and
Other Essays
A. Arblaster: The Rise and Decline
of Western Liberalism (esp. historical survey)
C. Pateman: The Problem of Political
Obligation
Rosenblum, R.: Another Liberalism
(Cambridge, Ma., Harvard University Press, 1987).
On Justice
D. Miller: Social Justice , Parts I
& III
J. Arthur & W. H, Shaw, eds:
Justice and Economic Distribution
J. Feinberg: Social Philosophy , Ch.
7
P. Pettit: Judging Justice
A. Brown: Modern Political
Philosophy
S. Benn & R. Peter: Social
Principles and the Democratic State , Ch. 6
B. Barry: Political Argument , Ch. 6
N. E. Bowie & R. L. Simon: The
Individual and the Political Order , Chs. 4 & 7
D. D. Raphael: Problems of Political
Philosophy , (useful collections of articles):
J. Feinberg & H. Gross: The
Philosophy of Law , Part III
T. L. Beauchamp, ed.: Ethics and
Public Policy , Part II
R. E. Flathman: Concepts in Social
and Political Philosophy , Part IV
J. P. Sterba, ed.: Justice
R. B. Brandt, ed.: Social Justice
C. J. Friedrich & J. W. Chapman,
eds: Justice (Nomos VI)
J. R. Lucas: On Justice
W. Galston: Justice and the Human
Good
Fisk, Milton : The State and Justice
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989).
Scherer, Klaus R. (ed.): Justice:
Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1992).
John Rawls
J. Rawls: A Theory of Justice esp.
extracts in Arthur & Shaw collection, Part I and Ch. 5
J. Rawls: 'Justice as fairness' in
P. Laslett, ed. Philosophy, Politics and Society
Rawls, J.: Political Liberalism (New
York, Columbia University Press, 1993).
A. Ryan: 'John Rawls' in Q. Skinner,
ed., The Return of Grand Theory in the Human Sciences
R. P. Wolff: Understanding Rawls
N. Daniels, ed.: Reading Rawls
B. Barry: The Liberal Theory of
Justice
P. Pettit: Judging Justice , Part V
Nielsen: article in Arthur &
Shaw
D. Miller: Social Justice , pp.
40-51
A. Brown: Modern Political
Philosophy , Ch. 3
M. Lessnoff: 'John Rawls' theory of
justice', Political Studies , 1971
M. Sandel: 'Justice and the good' in
his Liberalism and its Critics
Utilitarianism
J.S. Mill: Utilitarianism
P. Pettit,: Judging Justice , Part
IV
Alan Brown: Modern Political
Philosophy , Ch. 2
J. J. C. Smart & B. Williams:
Utilitarianism: For and against
P. Singer: Practical Ethics
J. J. C. Smart: 'Distributive
justice and utilitarianism' in Arthur & Shaw, Justice and Economic
Distribution
A. Sen & B. Williams, eds :
Utilitarianism and Beyond , CUP, 1981
D. H. Hodgson: Consequences of
Utilitarianism , 1967
D. Parfit: Later selves and moral
principles' in H. Montefiore, Philosophy and Personal Relations , RKP, 1973
N. Rescher: Distributive Justice ,
1966
J. Rawls: A Theory of Justice ,
relevant sections.
R. Nozick: Anarchy, State and Utopia
, relevant sections.
M. Sandel, ed.: Liberalism and its
Critics , Introduction.
Democracy
C. B. Macpherson: The Life and Times
of Liberal Democracy
D. Held: Models of Democracy
P. Singer: Democracy and
Disobedience
R.A. Dahl: Democracy and its Critics
J. Keane: Democracy and Civil
Society
C. Pateman: Participation and
Democratic Theory
F. A. Hayek: The Constitution of
Liberty
Law and Morality
H. L. A. Hart: Law, Liberty and
Morality
P. Devlin: The Enforcement of Morals
Bowie & Simon: The Individual
and the Political Order (chapter)
R. Dworkin: The Philosophy of Law
S. Lee: Law and Morals
S. Hampshire: Public and Private
Morality
L. Blom-Cooper et al.: Law and
Morality
E. J. Mishan: Psychodelics: A Test
Case
F. Logan: Should the law on Cannabis
be Changed?
S. Bessemer : Anti-Obscenity
G. Lester & J Dicken: Feminism
and Censorship
IV Problems of Socialism/ Equality
G. Kitching: Rethinking Socialism
M. Rustin: For a Pluralist Socialism
L. Johnston: Marxism, Class Analysis
and Socialist Pluralism
S. Lukes: Power: A Radical View
S. Lukes: Marxism and Morality
S.E. Bronner: Socialism Unbound .
A. Skillen: Ruling Illusions:
Philosophy and the social order .
Miller, David: Market, State and
Community (OUP) (for market socialism and socialist community).
N. P. Barry, Introduction to Modern
Political Theory , Chapter 7.
V. Gender/ Sexuality
Schochet, G.: Patriarchalism in
Political Thought .
Lloyd, G.: The Man of Reason: _Male'
and _female' in western philosophy .
Pateman, C.: The Sexual Contract .
Pateman, C. and Gross, E.: Feminist
Challenges: Social and political theory .
Philllips, A.: Engendering Democracy
.
Gould, C. G.: Rethinking Democracy .
Mohr, Richard D.: Gays/Justice .
Mohr, Richard D.: Gay Ideas: Outing
and other controversies (Beacon Press, Boston, 1992)
Okin, S. M.: Women in Western Political
Thought .
Okin, S. M.: Justice, Gender, and
the Family
Elshtain, J. B.: Public Man, Private
Woman: Women in social and political thought .
Evans, J. et al.: Feminism and
Political Theory .
Siltanen, J. and Stanworth, M.:
Women and the Public Sphere .
Gilligan, C.: In a Different Voice .
O'Brien, M.: The Politics of
Reproduction .
VI. Communitarianism.
Avineri, S. et al (eds.)
Communitarianism and Individualism (useful collection with a lot of references
to further reading)
Daniels, N.: _Equal liberty and
unequal worth of liberty' in N. Daniels, ed. Reading Rawls .
Fisk, M.: _History and reason in
Rawls' moral theory' in N. Daniels, ed. Reading Rawls .
Marilyn Friedman _Feminism and
modern friendship' in Avineri et al. (eds) Communitarianism and Individualism,
pp. 101-119.
Gutmann, Amy: _Communitarian Critics
of Liberalism' in Avineri et al. Communitarianism and Individualism, pp.
120-136.
Kukathas, C. and Pettit, P.: Rawls:
A theory of justice and its critics , Ch. 6.
Kymlicka, W.: Liberalism, Community
and Culture .
Kymlicka, W.: Contemporary Political
Philosophy , Ch. 6.
Kymlicka, W.: _Community' in
Blackwell's A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy .
Larmore, C.: Patterns of Moral
Complexity .
Lukes, S.: Marxism and Morality ,
Ch. 3, pp. 27-36.
MacIntyre, A.: After Virtue .
MacIntyre, A.: Whose Justice? Which
Rationality?
Mulhall, S. & Swift, A.:
Liberals and Communitarians .
Okin, S. M.: Justice, Gender, and
the Family , Chs. 2-3 & 6.
Sandel, M. J.: Liberalism and the
Limits of Justice .
Sandel, M. J.: _Justice and the
good' in Liberalism and its Critics .
Sandel, M. J.: _Morality and the
Liberal Ideal', The New Republic , 190/8, 7 May 1984.
Shapiro, I.: Political Criticism ,
esp. Ch. 3.
Walzer, M.: Spheres of Justice .
Young, I. M.: _The ideal of
community and the politics of difference' in Feminism/Postmodernism (ed. L. J.
Nicholson).
Return to Contents.
LECTURER :
Dr. David West _ Office Hours TBA
COPLAND 1167 (Bldg. #24)
David.West@anu.edu.au
Tel.: (02-612)54256 where you can
also leave a message (after about 7 rings)
Home page: http://arts.anu.edu.au/sss/west/
Via SCHOOL OFFICE: Tel.
(02-612)54420. Fax. (02-612)52222.
ACADEMIC SKILLS AND LEARNING CENTRE
For assistance with assignment
writing and completion, visit the Academic Skills and Learning Centre, Lower
Ground Floor, Pauline Griffin Building (Building #11) Website: https://academicskills.anu.edu.au/
INFORMATION LITERACY PROGRAM
Social Sciences and Humanities,
Contact Jenny Edwards, Jenny.Edwards@anu.edu.au
, ext. 54086.
IT Training, Contact Karen Visser,
Karen.Visser@anu.edu.au , ext. 58279
InFlite _ ONLINE INFORMATION
LITERACY TUTORIAL
Otto _ ONLINE IT TRAINING
COUNSELLING CENTRE
For personal difficulties and help.
Counselling is free and confidential.
Health and Counselling Centre
Building , North Road (next to Sports Union) (Bldg 18). Tel. 02-61252442.
http://www.anu.edu.au/counsel/
JABAL CENTRE
Help and advice for Indigenous students.
Lower Melville Hall (Bldg 12). Tel.
02-61253520.
ANU STUDENTS ASSOCIATION (ANUSA)
• ANUSA is the representative
body of undergraduate students on campus. Two elected Arts Faculty
representatives sit on ANUSA.
• Your Arts Faculty
representatives are advocates within the Faculty for student concerns,
particularly on academic issues. They sit on College Committees, including the
Education Committee, and can also liaise with the Faculty regarding student
appeals.
• If you would like to contact
your 2007 Arts Faculty representatives, Saskia Vervoorn and Anya Aidman, please
e-mail arts.facrep@anu.edu.au
• The ANUSA website is http://sa.anu.edu.au .
Return to Contents.
RETURN TO David West's Home Page
Please send any suggestions for new
links to <David.West@anu.edu.au>
Australia
Felix - Jeremy Bentham and his Influence in Australia
Encyclopedia
Britannica online.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Normative Political
Theory at the American Political Science Association.
Oxford
English Dictionary online.
Political
Studies Association of the UK.
Political Thought at Richard
Kimber's Political Science Resources.
Spoon Collective links on
radical and/or critical political philosophy/theory.
Stanford
Encylopedia of Philosophy.
PAST LECTURE OUTLINES (2001)
Outlines will be posted here just
before each week's lectures.
- 3. Global Justice: From
Utilitarianism to Global Human Rights
- 4. Nozick,
Natural Rights and the Minimal State
- 5. John
Rawls' Theory of Justice: Part I
- 6. John
Rawls' Theory of Justice - Part II
- 7. Susan
Okin: A Feminist Critique of Rawls
- 8-9. No Lectures.
- 10. Michael Walzer's Spheres
of Justice: Pluralism and Community
- 11. Alternative
Conceptions of Freedom
- 12. Green Political
Theory: Nature as a Political Value
3. Global Justice: From
Utilitarianism to Global Human Rights
I. Introduction
1. Utilitarianism as an
attempt to formulate a rational morality independent of cultural and,
especially, religious assumptions and traditions.
2. Major historical figures: Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), John Stuart Mill
(1806-1873), Henry Sidgwick (1838-1900).
3. Utilitarianism is interesting because of influence on Australian
political history and culture.
II. Utilitarianism as Hedonist Consequentialism
1. Value of pleasure or
satisfaction as self-evident principle of rational morality.
2. Prudence or enlightened self-interest of overall pleasure over course
of a life.
3. D. Hume's (1711-76) view of justice as usefulness to society.
4. The _impartial spectator' and the _objective point of view' of morality.
5. Priority of consequentialism of _the good' over deontology of _the
right'.
6. Radical implications of utilitarianism: homosexuality, suicide,
euthanasia.
7. Utilitarianism against rights, against moral intuitions; act-
vs. rule-utilitarianism.
III. Utilitarianism: Criticisms, Developments and Variants
1. Conservative criticisms of
debasing _morality' and _swinish pleasures'.
2. J. S. Mill on quality of _higher' pleasures against quantity of
_lower' pleasures.
3. Conflicting interpretations of utility: pleasure, satisfaction,
happiness, good life, preference satisfaction.
4. Problem of calculating utility: over a life; comparing
individuals.
5. Economic interpretation of utility: wealth as a _primary good'.
IV. Implications of Utilitarianism: Towards a Global View of
Justice
1. Utilitarianism and the
collective or democratic strand of liberal democracy.
2. Neglecting the _distinctness of persons' and individual rights
(Nozick, Rawls).
3. Utilitarianism and indifference to distribution of wealth or
utility: efficiency as criterion; diminishing marginal utility as
argument for equality.
4. Act of omission and commission: the infinite scope of
utilitarian responsibility.
5. Peter Singer on consideration for _all sentient beings'; value
of animals vs. infants.
6. Justice without borders: justice not limited by national
borders.
7. Overall, utilitarianism as demanding moral doctrine incompatible with
individual projects, lives?
V. Global Justice and Human Rights
1. . C. Jones, Global
Justice: Defending Cosmopolitanism
distributive justice is best conceived in terms of human rights, from which it follows both that nation-state borders lack any fundamental ethical standing and that the demands of global justice include various positive actions aimed at protecting the vital interests of everyone, regardless of their location, nationality, or citizenship. (p. 2)
2. _Cosmopolitan' vs. _communitarian' views of
justice.
3. _Basic rights' approach to justice as correction of utilitarian
perspective: avoids problem of impossibly _saintly utilitarian'.
4. Problem of assigning _positive duties' to satisfy global rights;
institutional solutions.
5. Communitarian views of global justice: loyalty to friends,
family, nation; _confined generosity' of human beings. Truth in
communitarian views of global justice?
4. Nozick,
Natural Rights and the Minimal State
I. Introduction
1. Nozick's aims: (i) to
justify the minimal state; (ii) to show that nothing more extensive than
the minimal state is justified.
2. Minimal state enforces internal law and order; defence against
external aggressors. As favoured state of libertarians and new right/
neo-liberalism.
3. Nozick as radical (or reactionary?) in relation to contemporary
western societies.
II. Nozick on Natural Rights
1. Assumption of individual
natural rights prior to society, law and institutions.
2. Rights as absolute _side constraints' or the priority of _right' over
_good' and attack on consequentialism (e.g. utilitarianism); against
consequentialism of rights as well.
3. Justification for rights: individuals as _ends and never merely
means' (Kant); separateness of persons and non-existence of _social
entity' justifying redistribution; neutrality of state.
4. Nozick's Lockean list of rights as _possessive individualism'
(Macpherson); central role of private property rights.
5. Nozick's rights as negative rather than positive rights, bec.
redistribution violates rights.
6. Indifference to political rights; Nozick on _demoktesis' and
democracy.
7. Rights _foundational' rather than _derivative'; absolute rather
than conditional.
III. The _Invisible Hand' Justification of the State
1. Starting point designed to convince
even the anarchist, who believes no state is justified. Therefore, a
strong justification of the state.
2. _Invisible hand' of capitalist economy translating individual
self-interest into economic common good (Adam Smith).
3. Analogous transition from _state of nature' to minimal state without
violating natural rights.
4. Comparison of Nozick with Hobbes: Nozick's optimism vs Hobbes's
pessimism about state of nature; _invisible hand' vs contract derivation
of the state; minimal vs absolute state.
5. Nozick asserts p rimacy of morality over politics or _justice as
legitimacy': i.e. legitimacy of the state depends on its compatibility
with pre-existing natural rights.
IV. Derivation of the Minimal State
1. Locke's account of the state
of nature as _most favoured situation of anarchy' with rationally
self-interested agents and only occasional rights violations.
2. _Protection agencies' as private police forces hired by individuals.
3. The emergence of a _dominant protection agency' (DPA). But DPA
is not yet a state: no monopoly; no universal provision of
protection.
4. From the DPA to the minimal or _night-watchman' state: monopoly
of jurisdiction and coercion; compensation; non-redistributive
provision for poor.
5. Remaining anarchist doubts about the minimal state?
V. Limiting the State
1. Negative natural rights do
not require anything more than a minimal state.
2. Redistribution violates natural rights, so more-than-minimal
redistributive state is illegitimate. But possibility of
non-intentionally-redistributive activities.
3. Redistribution presupposes a non-existent collective entity (c.f.
Hayek, Thatcher).
4. _End-state' and _patterned' principles of distribution
illegitimate; only temporarily effective, so must be continually
reinforced by authoritarian govt (Wilt Chamberlain).
5. Only _historical' principles are legitimate: entitlement theory
of ownership - rights in acquisition, transfer and rectification. But
radical implications of rectification?
5. John Rawls'
Theory of Justice: Part I.
I. Introduction
1. Problem of grounding
normative political philosophy; positivism and subjectivism about
values; philosophy as conceptual analysis.
2. By contrast, Rawls's Theory of Justice (1971) as substantive,
systematic, substantial, influential.
3. Rawls' overall position is compatible with welfare state liberal
capitalism, but also market socialism.
II. The Method: Reflective Equilibrium
1. The sceptical, analytical
background: task of philosophy as analysis or definition of concepts
without substantive moral or political implications.
2. Rawls' aim to produce substantive moral theory. But there are no
self-evident moral principles or completely reliable intuitions (c.f.
utilitarianism).
3. Rawls' method of _reflective equilibrium' or long term balance between
considered intuitions and proposed general principles.
4. Problem with this _coherence' view of moral truth: e.g.
possibility of consistent but obnoxious intuitions and principles. But
how else can we ground values?
III. Critique of Utilitarianism and Majoritarianism
1. Utilitarianism and
majoritarianism (democratic principle) as two dominant approaches to politics
(until 1970s).
2. Problems with consequentialist ethics (utilitarianism): innocent
individual (c.f. Nozick); indifference to distribution (but c.f.
_diminishing marginal utility'); as a conception of the common good, not
justice.
3. _Impartial spectator' approach to morality overcomes selfishness, but ignores
separateness of persons/ issues of justice.
4. Problems with majoritarianism: formal inconsistencies;
tyranny of the majority.
5. Rawls advocates priority of _right' over _good', or deontology over
consequentialism: pursuit of welfare and democracy constrained by rights
and justice.
6. But note that welfare/ common good is still an important part of
theory of justice.
IV. Contract Theory and the Original Position
1. Contract approach
guarantees respect for the distinctness and plurality of persons.
2. Principles derived from _pure' (rather than _perfect' or _imperfect')
procedural justice.
3. The _original position' as a hypothetical device or thought
experiment; its place in reflective equilibrium.
4. The parties to the original position: rationally
self-interested, mutually disinterested individuals with a plurality of values,
living under conditions of scarcity.
5. The _veil of ignorance' excludes principles that favour certain
individuals/ fair.
6. Original position concerned with _primary goods', or things _useful
for any rational plan' of life: as _thin' theory of the good;
individualism; materialism?
V. Selecting the Two Principles of Justice
1. The parties to the original
position decide as one. Is it still a contract theory?
2. Pessimistic _maximin' strategy to maximise the chances of the
worst-off.
3. Compare gambler's strategy (max. average/ utilitarianism) and
optimistic _maximax' strategy (max. chances of the best-off/ elitism).
4. Maximin as egalitarian in the sense that it requires _equality for all
unless inequalities work to the advantage of the worst-off'.
5. Grounds for the maximin strategy: ignorance of
probabilities; ensuring a reasonable minimum; cautious
responsibility for future generations.
6. But in comparing different societies, maximin strategy ignores all but
the worst-off.
6. John Rawls'
Theory of Justice - Part II.
I. General and Special Conceptions of Justice
1. Maximin strategy leads to
general conception of justice that _all primary social goods be distributed
equally unless an unequal distribution would be to everyone's advantage'
(Theory of Justice, p. 150).
2. The general conception allows unequal rights and liberties as well as
unequal wealth, if inequalities will lead to a greater allocation of primary
goods to the worst-off.
3. General conception is designed for economically less developed
societies: e.g. authoritarian conditions enhancing primary
industrialisation.
II. The Priority of Liberty
1. The condition for the
priority of liberty is a level of development at which both the _free internal
life' of communities and political aspirations (democracy) become more
important than further material improvements.
2. C.f. Maslow's hierarchy of needs: moral and political needs
become more important once basic material needs are satisfied.
3. Argument for freedom of conscience from the original position.
4. Argument for equal citizenship and democracy as the basis of
self-respect.
5. The outcome of these arguments is the fully articulated special
conception of justice with the two principles of (I) equal liberty and (II)
difference principle:
I. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all. II. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both: (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged... and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. (p. 302)
6. Lexical ordering (as opposed to weighting) of
the two principles: i.e. there can be no trading of liberties for wealth
once the special conception is in operation.
III. The Difference Principle
1. That, subject to the
principle of equal liberty, socio-economic inequalities will be arranged to the
ultimate advantage of the worst-off (see II, 5).
2. The egalitarian basis of the difference principle: society as
co-operative enterprise.
3. Alternative systems of distributive justice: _natural liberty'
(c.f. Hayek and Nozick); _liberal equality' (meritocracy);
_democratic equality' (Rawls).
4. Criticisms from the right: Nozick's view that Rawlsian
distribution violates natural rights of ownership over (benefits from) social
and natural assets.
5. Criticism from the left: relative poverty and
self-respect; against _socialism as envy'.
IV Concluding Remarks
1. Does Rawls's theory of
justice amount to a conservative defence or radical critique of _actually
existing' liberal capitalism?
2. Compatibility of Rawls' theory of justice with market socialism:
market with social ownership of means of production.
3. Application of the theory depends on its empirical assumptions:
role of incentives; optimum degree of inequality;
_chain-connectedness' and _close-knitness' of expectations.
4. Does the difference principle embody a commitment to fraternity.
7. Susan
Okin: A Feminist Critique of Rawls.
_To a large extent, contemporary theories of justice, like those of the past, are about men with wives at home'. (Okin, Justice, Gender, and the Family, p. 13)
I. Introduction: Comparison
of Socialist and Feminist Critiques
1. Socialist critique of the
abstraction of liberal political thought from economy or sphere of
production: public/ private dichotomy (I).
2. Feminist critique of the abstraction of liberal thought from the
family or sphere of reproduction: public/ private dichotomy (II).
3. Possible extension of liberal principles to economy: positive
rights, workplace democracy, economic justice.
4. Possible extension of liberal principles to sphere of
reproduction: justice within the family, gender equality etc. Is
that enough to answer feminist criticisms?
II. The Patriarchal Origins of Liberal Thought
1. Patriarchal assumptions of
classic liberal theorists: Locke, Rousseau and Hobbes.
2. Pateman's Sexual Contract: 17-18th century contract theories
seen as part of a rebellion against traditional patriarchy or _rule of the
father'.
3. But the social contract was accompanied by a hidden _fraternal
contract', which reinforced the subordination of women by instituting modern
patriarchy as _rule of the brothers' (not rule of the father).
4. What are the implications of Pateman's historical critique of contract
theory for contemporary liberals such as Rawls'?
III. Gender in Rawls' Theory of Justice
1. Rawls' failure to address
the issue of the gender of _heads of families' and sex in the veil of
ignorance.
2. Representative heads of family are supposed to be concerned for future
generations.
3. But this representative device excludes consideration of relations
within the family (of gender or between generations), which become _opaque to
claims of justice'.
4. Okin's arguments for treatment of the family as a topic of justice:
(i) Family and gender relations are not natural or biologically given.
(ii) Intrafamilial relationships have important effects on interfamilial
inequalities, which Rawls does regard as the concern of a theory of justice.
(iii) Families are not beyond justice (c.f. Sandel). Justice is an
essential, even if not necessarily the highest, virtue of family life
(Kymlicka).
(iv) Family as _the earliest school of moral development'.
Therefore families must be just, if they are not to be _schools of despotism'
(J. S. Mill).
(v) Families are important contexts for the development of _empathy and a
readiness to listen', necessary for effective participation in the original
position.
IV. Okin's _Humanist Conception of Justice'
1. Okin's feminist revision of
Rawls' theory: (a) sex covered by veil of ignorance; (b) institution of
the family included as topic of justice in the original position.
2. Implications for currently gendered organisation of society:
elimination and/or depoliticisation of gender; some concrete proposals.
3. Is the elimination of gender practicable or desirable (Nussbaum)?
4. Okin takes for granted the Western (heterosexual monogamous) nuclear
family.
5. Nussbaum's _thicker' theory of the good: justice as _equality of
capabilities' (power) rather than resources (primary goods).
10. Michael Walzer's Spheres
of Justice: Pluralism and Community.
I. Walzer's Approach to Justice
1. Walzer's anti-authoritarian
communitarianism for pluralism and _complex equality'.
2. Contextualist conception of justice:
Justice is relative to social meanings... A given society is just if its substantive life is lived in a certain way - that is, faithful to the shared understandings of its members (SJ, pp. 312-3).
3. No universal or transcendental theory
of justice, valid for all societies, is possible.
4. Justice involves pluralist respect for disagreements between and
within cultures.
5. Role of political theorist as _connected criticism' or criticism in
terms of the values of the community criticised (_immanent critique').
6. Problems of relativism: resolving conflict; society's
shared understandings may involve domination of subordinate groups (e.g. caste
society, patriarchy).
II. Spheres of Justice
1. _Spheres of justice':
diversity of social goods and criteria of distribution.
2. Within a culture justice means recognising the distinctive claims of
different spheres of justice; _tyranny' is the overriding of such claims.
3. _Dominant' goods are goods whose possession implies command over a
wide range of other goods belonging to different spheres.
4. Example: the dominance of money in commercial society;
Marx in Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts.
5. Preliminary discussion of particular spheres of justice and
various principles of distribution: money; goods and
commodities; jobs & offices; health; education;
love and affection.
III. Simple and Complex Equality or Monopoly vs Dominance
1. _Monopoly' as _the holding
of dominant goods against rivals' (p. 11).
2. Ideal of _simple equality' as elimination of monopoly (e.g. equality
of wealth).
3. But simple equality leaves dominance unchallenged, though reduces its
extent.
4. Simple equality may lead to problems associated with socialism:
intrusive state; dominance of political power and office.
5. _Complex equality' as the elimination of dominance: distribution
within each sphere according to its own criteria; compensating
inequalities in other spheres.
6. Walzer's criticisms of both liberalism and socialism: neglect of
dominance of money by liberalism; neglect of dominance of power and
office by socialism.
7. Distinctive defence of welfare as what is required to _sustain and
enhance a common culture' (p. 74). E.g. mediaeval Judaism; Ancient
Athens etc.
IV. Community and Membership
1. Communities have the right
to choose their members: _the distinctiveness of cultures and groups
depends upon closure and, without it, cannot be conceived as a stable feature
of human life' (p. 39). As racism or chauvinism?
2. Right of exclusion qualified by duty to aid needy _strangers'.
3. White Australia: _White Australia could survive only as Little
Australia'. (p. 47)
4. Communities must also be _politically inclusive': i.e. all
inhabitants must have the rights of citizenship ? no _metics' (Ancient Athens)
or _guest workers' accorded second-class citizenship:
The theory of distribute justice begins, then, with an account of membership rights. It must vindicate at one and the same time the (limited) right of closure, without which there could be no communities at all, and the political inclusiveness of the existing communities. For it is only as members somewhere that men and women can hope to share in all the other social goods ? security, wealth, honor, office, and power ? that communal life makes possible. (p. 63)
11. Alternative Conceptions of
Freedom.
I. Introduction
1. Communitarian criticism
that liberal individualism weakens relationship of individual to community and
its goals.
2. Liberal freedom is also negative rather than positive in two
senses: (i) formal rather than effective freedom; (ii) assumes given
wants rather than real or authentic interests.
II. Formal vs. Effective Liberty
1. Liberalism and the
_bourgeoisie': the self-sufficient individual; freedom as being
left alone.
2. Liberalism concerned with negative rather than positive rights;
resources.
3. Rawls's two principles of justice: commitment to equal formal
liberty, but unequal effective liberty or _worth of liberty' (Daniels) acc.
difference principle.
4. The worse off in the _just' society may:
(i) have freedoms worth much less than those of others;
(ii) exert less influence through the democratic process (politics of
support) and over the society governed by that process (politics of power) (A.
Gamble);
(iii) suffer domination through illegal distortions of the democratic
process (e.g. corruption).
III. Equal Liberty and Unequal Worth of Liberty
1. Rawls's distinction between
formal liberty and _worth of liberty' or effective liberty.
2. Failure of distinction according to N. Daniels: arguments from
the original position and from respect.
3. Worth of liberty is not a _monotonic function' of index of primary
goods, because relative rather than absolute wealth may determine worth of
liberty (e.g. democracy).
4. Egalitarian implications of the original position on Daniels'
interpretation. C.f. Okin's internal critique of Rawls.
IV. Positive Freedom and the Authenticity of Wants
1. Positive freedom and
_authenticity' of wants: ideology, culture, manipulation.
2. Individualist view of individuals, as fully-formed and pre-social,
ignores formation and possible deformation of individuals (and their wants)
within society .
3. Rawls's blindness to ideology: patriarchy; children;
market capitalism.
4. Liberals identify dangers with positive conceptions of freedom as the
_fulfilment of real interests' (see I. Berlin _Two Concepts of Liberty'), esp.
paternalism (forcing people to be free).
5. Berlin's description of _independent momentum' from positive freedom
to tyranny.
6. The _paradox of enlightenment' for critics of society whose values are
predominantly libertarian and democratic:
_ if they are to remain true to their political values they may implement no changes without the consent of those who are affected by them, and if they seek to implement no such changes, then they acquiesce in the persistence of a social system radically at odds with their political values. (Ted Benton)
7. An acceptable concept of positive freedom
need not have the authoritarian implications of organic, collective and reified
views of the self opposed by Berlin.
12 Green Political
Theory: Nature as a Political Value
I. Introduction
1. Contemporary importance of
_green' and _ecological' politics only recently reflected in political
theory. Similar situation in relation to gender (c.f. Okin on Rawls).
2. Distinctive questions of green theory: consideration of
relationship between human beings and non-human nature/ animals rather than
relationships among human beings.
II. Historical Stages in the Relationship between Humanity and
Nature
1. Earliest stage of
vulnerability to nature. Animism and worship of nature.
2. Stage of increasing control over nature: agriculture;
basic technology. Nature as an hierarchical order with humanity (or God)
at the top.
3. Modern and post-Enlightenment period: accelerating development
of natural science, technology and production. Dualism (Descartes) views
nature including animals as purely mechanical system to be ruthlessly exploited
by human beings.
4. Current ecological crisis: limits to growth; renewed
vulnerability of humanity to nature; systemic and global effects on
nature.
5. Paradoxically, human beings become objects rather than subjects of
productive process.
III. Shallow vs. Deep Ecology
1. Green political thought
reformulates nature/ humanity relationship: shallow and deep variants.
2. Deep ecology (ecocentrism) accords intrinsic value to nature (animals,
species).
3. Some issues for deep ecology: extension of moral value;
conflicts of interest between species; species vs. individuals;
spiritual vs. secular basis.
4. Difficulty of grounding deep ecology in secular post-Enlightenment
rationalism: Kant on moral subjects and objects; natural
rights; utilitarianism.
5. Shallow ecology as enlightened anthropocentrism/ humanism:
long-term and unintended consequences; aesthetic qualities of
nature; intergenerational justice.
6. Comparison of deep and shallow ecology: instrumentalism;
animals; ecocentrism as a pragmatic commitment.
IV. Green Thought and its Relationship to Other Political
Ideologies
1. How does green ideology
relate to other issues and ideologies?
2. Politics of contemporary _greens' includes wide range of issues not
directly related to nature: feminism; minority rights;
international justice; peace; participatory democracy.
3. Theoretical independence of attitude to nature and to relationships
between human beings.
4. Relationship between green ideology and other ideologies:
fascism; conservatism; socialism and Marxism; feminism;
liberalism.
V. Environmentalism vs. Ecology
1. Dobson's distinction (Green
Political Thought, Routledge, 1990).
2. Environmentalism _seeks a cleaner service economy, sustained by
cleaner technology and producing cleaner affluence' (p. 9).
3. Ecology/ Greens _desire to restructure the whole of political, social
and economic life' (p. 3).
4. The radical ecological programme combines the issues of green politics
to challenge the _dominant paradigm' of industrial society.
Return to Contents.
SUPPLEMENTARY
LECTURE OUTLINES
1.
Between Utopianism and Apathy
2. Hayek - A Programme
for the New Right
3.
Communitarianism: Individual and Community
1. Between Utopianism and
Apathy
I. Introduction
1. Last lecture: facts
depend on values, so political science depends on political theory.
2. But values also depend on facts, because political values must be
realisable.
3. So what is it for a set of political values to be realisable?
Political goals must lie somewhere between the impossible and the actual - or
between utopianism and conformism.
II. The Problem of Agency
1. Political problems are
social and therefore involve the intentions and actions of other people.
2. Some examples: poverty & unemployment; feminism and
personal politics; crime; illiteracy (P. Freire).
3. The _problem of agency': how to achieve the cooperation,
acquiescence or defeat of other people in order to achieve a political goal.
4. But even good intentions are insufficient: the fate of New
Year's resolutions:
_The road to hell is paved with good intentions'
5. Insufficiency of good intentions in social contexts: for
example, utopian communities and shared houses; welfare state vs market economics.
III. Utopian Political Thought
1. Time and political
goals: from the immediately realisable through the long-term goal and the
infinite ideal (_Aim high') to the impossible (_A society for angels').
2. More's Utopia from _outopia' (Gk: nowhere) and _eutopia' (Gk: a good
place): archetype of the unattainable political ideal.
3. Compare examples of non-utopian political thought: written for a
collective agent with the desire/ will and the power to realise a particular
goal (Machiavelli's Prince; Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations and the rise
of the _middling classes').
4. Marx and Engels's critique of _utopian socialism' (see Engels
reading): agency of revolutionary class; inevitable (?) development
of capitalism.
5. Marx and Engels's _scientific socialism': capitalism as its own
grave digger; creation of a large, unified, homogenised, self-conscious
working class with an interest in socialist revolution.
IV. The Value of Utopian Thought
1. Still, utopian thought may
be useful: as disguised critique; as imaginative anticipation or
exploration of alternative societies or forms of life; as persuasion (see
Kumar & Lukes).
2. Politics as an existential attitude:
_Be
realistic, demand the impossible?' (anon., Paris, 1968)
_What is needed: pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will' (A.
Gramsci)
3. Making changes: http://www.anu.edu.au/~e901266/mc.html.
4. The fragility of progress: if you don't try to improve things,
they might get worse (Germany, 1920; Yugoslavia, 1980; Australia
and Hansonism, 1999?).
2. Hayek - A Programme for the New Right
I. Introduction
1. Hayek's view of libertarianism
as a sceptical, _humble' ideology apparently in conflict with the ambitious
scope of his _new right' programme.
2. Hayek's social theory as response to Marxism and other threats to
liberty.
II. Sceptical Epistemology ? A Philosophical Attack on Revolution
and Utopia
1. Popper's falsificationism -
no secure confirmation of theories; only falsification.
2. Falsificationism supports _critical' as opposed to _constructivist
rationalism'.
3. Critical rationalism implies _piecemeal' or liberal vs. _utopian' or
totalitarian social engineering.
4. Compare Oakeshott's critique of rationalism in politics. But
Hayek supports small-scale reformism and some kinds of rationalism; e.g.
argument for markets (see below).
III. The Social Distribution of Knowledge ? A Pragmatic Defence of
Markets
1. Practical or tacit
knowledge (c.f. Oakeshott) and the functioning of societies.
2. But practical knowledge is inevitably distributed throughout
society: anti-elitism of Hayek as compared to Oakeshott.
3. Economic market as _cognitive mechanism' for use of tacit economic
knowledge distributed throughout society.
4. Central economic planning inevitably counterproductive, because it is
based on inadequate (merely technical) knowledge.
IV. Spontaneous Orders and Social Evolution ? A Pragmatic
Defence of Tradition
1. _Spontaneous order'
or _catallaxy' (cosmos) vs. _planned' or _designed order' (taxis):
language and market as examples of spontaneous order.
2. Social institutions as learning mechanisms in competition; c.f.
natural selection.
3. Evolutionary theory of social change as learning occurs over time,
which implies the value of tradition as accumulated learning.
4. Therefore central planning is doubly inadequate, because it ignores
(synchronic) social distribution and (diachronic) historical accumulation of
knowledge.
5. Dilemma for Hayek: what happens when social evolution
spontaneously threatens _spontaneous' orders such as the free market (as warned
in The Road to Serfdom)?
6. Conservative doubts: spontaneous disorder as possible outcome of
spontaneous change: e.g. emergence of welfare state/ road to serfdom.
V. Social Philosophy ? A Moral Defence of Markets and Freedom
1. Kantian universalist
ethics: impartiality, rule of law and the neutral state.
2. Freedom as the autonomous pursuit of happiness.
3. Implies formal as opposed to substantive law and negative freedom.
4. Free market favoured, because it allows the autonomous pursuit of
happiness. Collectivism and planning rejected, because they impose
substantive goals on society.
5. Rejection of political freedom and suspicion of democracy, because
they threaten (real) negative freedom: substantive goals beyond rule of
law; taxation; social justice.
VI. Against Social Justice - A Moral Attack on Egalitarianism
1. Distinguish egalitarian
commitment to material equality from equality of treatment.
2. Egalitarianism as illiberal, because it implies unequal
treatment; as collectivist imposition of goals on society.
3. Justice presupposes responsibility of human agents, so no such thing
as social justice, which is based on envy. Hayek's rejection of notion of
_relative deprivation'.
4. The social benefits of inequality: inheritance, family, culture.
3. Communitarianism:
Individual and Community
I. Introduction
1. Historical
background: centrality of religious and economic freedom to emergence of
liberalism.
2. Associated limitations of liberalism: (I) individualism;
(II) negative freedom.
3. To address (I) individualism: (a) communitarian critique and
_politics of the common good' (this week); (b) Walzer's _complex
equality' (week 10).
II. The Historical Background of Liberal Individualism
1. Individualism in
religion: Protestantism and individual's direct relationship with
God; individual salvation; democratic church government.
2. Individualism as the basis for religious toleration (at least of other
Protestants).
3. Individualism in economics: market relations;
self-reliance; destruction of communal structures of feudalism.
4. Rawls's individualistic assumptions reflect these historical
origins: self-interest & mutual disinterest of parties to the
original position.
III. The Communitarian Critique of the Abstract Individual
1. Abstract individual as a
fiction: constitution of individual through socialisation, language,
social practices, _ethical life' (Sittlichkeit).
2. Social constitution undermines the neo-Kantian project of producing a
transcendental (universal and timeless) basis for moral and political
values. Cf Hegel, Oakeshott.
3. For communitarians moral judgment is understood not as choice but as
discovery in the context of the shared values of an historical community
(Sandel).
4. In fact, later Rawls of Political Liberalism adopts a more
contextualist approach to his theory of justice as appropriate to societies
with a particular history (Cf Section I).
IV. The Politics of the Common Good
1. Politics of the common good
in contrast to neutral liberal state of (a) utilitarianism (all preferences)
(b) Rawls (only just preferences).
2. Politics of the common good does not give equal weight to preferences,
because only _good' preferences deserve to be satisfied.
3. Strengths of politics of common good: stronger commitment to
community & welfare; firmer basis for legitimacy of political
institutions; response to alienation of modern societies reduces danger
of less attractive response (racism, nationalism).
4. Potential dangers of politics of common good: agreeing on the
common good; intolerant, authoritarian and/or exclusionary implications.
5. Historical communities and exclusion: Ancient Greece, 18C New
England.
6. Possibly conservative implications: pornography and homosexuality.
C.f. liberal support for privacy against _legal moralism'.
V. Between Individualism and Communitarianism
1. Common ground between
communitarianism and liberalism (see Kymlicka).
2. Possibility of criticising any value, if not all the values, that we
inherit from our communities.
3. Importance, even for liberals, of creating and preserving the cultural
conditions of autonomous choice.
4. Emphasis on access to culture: concern for illiteracy, language.
5. Critical access to culture: critical cultural studies;
risks of commercialisation of culture.
6. Cultural rights of ethnic and indigenous communities.