Suchergebnisse

Wirtschaftsaufschwung, Korruptionsbekämpfung und eine eiserne Hand gegen Gewaltkriminalität hat Jair Bolsonaro im Wahlkampf versprochen - heute bilden sie die schwachen Flanken des Präsidenten: Brasilien ist ein Epizentrum der Covid‑19-Pandemie geworden. Auch wenn Bolsonaro diese kleinredet und sich gegen die Eindämmungsmaßnahmen stellt, zeitigen das Virus und das chaotische Krisen­manage­ment gravie­rende sanitäre, soziale und ökonomische Folgen für Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Ermittlungen, unter anderem wegen Korruption, sowie die Enthüllungen des zurückgetretenen Justiz­ministers nehmen den Präsidenten und seine Familie ins Visier. Während die Mord­rate im Jahr 2020 wieder ansteigt, plädierte Bolsonaro in einer Kabinett­sitzung für den bewaffneten Widerstand der Bevölkerung gegen die Politik des Ge­sundheits­schutzes in den Bundesstaaten. Der vom Impeachment bedrohte Präsident ringt um sein politisches Überleben und fordert dabei rechtsstaatliche und demokratische Prinzipien heraus. (Autorenreferat)

Practices of listening, receptive corporeal traveling, and moving the democratic table among different constituencies and locations are vital to democratic struggles in a heterogeneous world. Marginalizing these practices weakens ethical-political vision and the strategic capacities of radical democracy. First, this article discusses the importance of moving beyond the accent on voice in a lot of democratic theory, to focus more on practices of listening. Second, it discusses the limits of listening and theorizes the need for practices of receptive corporeal traveling beyond the power-saturated borders and scripted flows of human bodies that characterize most cities. Third, it suggests these insights might alter a fundamental metaphor underpinning many democratic theories, through a critical discussion of the imaginary of the solid democratic "table." It is better to construe democracy as "tabling": an activity in which the tables of engagement must be repeatedly altered by being moved and multiplied.

This paper examines the new forms of political participation, whose central feature is not a gathering power of political solidarity, but a chequebook participation that developed in recent decades as a result of neoliberal policies. This so called "professionalised" approach overtakes traditional grassroots activists' practises. Political solidarity – one of the three essential elements of democracy (together with freedom and equality) – has been gradually replaced by managerial techniques resulting in a deepening deficit of democracy. One of the reasons behind the changing trends in political participation is the so-called professionalisation of the non-governmental sector, when hired administrators substitute face-to-face grassroots actions by managerial sales strategies. As a result, we see more individualised participatory actions which do not aim at changing any existing political institutions into more socially just ones. Individualised civic participation changes the traditional forms and motives of political solidarity as well as political mobilisation; as a result, democratic citizenry experiences are reduced to political participation.

This paper examines the new forms of political participation, whose central feature is not a gathering power of political solidarity, but a chequebook participation that developed in recent decades as a result of neoliberal policies. This so called "professionalised" approach overtakes traditional grassroots activists' practises. Political solidarity – one of the three essential elements of democracy (together with freedom and equality) – has been gradually replaced by managerial techniques resulting in a deepening deficit of democracy. One of the reasons behind the changing trends in political participation is the so-called professionalisation of the non-governmental sector, when hired administrators substitute face-to-face grassroots actions by managerial sales strategies. As a result, we see more individualised participatory actions which do not aim at changing any existing political institutions into more socially just ones. Individualised civic participation changes the traditional forms and motives of political solidarity as well as political mobilisation; as a result, democratic citizenry experiences are reduced to political participation.

This paper examines the new forms of political participation, whose central feature is not a gathering power of political solidarity, but a chequebook participation that developed in recent decades as a result of neoliberal policies. This so called "professionalised" approach overtakes traditional grassroots activists' practises. Political solidarity – one of the three essential elements of democracy (together with freedom and equality) – has been gradually replaced by managerial techniques resulting in a deepening deficit of democracy. One of the reasons behind the changing trends in political participation is the so-called professionalisation of the non-governmental sector, when hired administrators substitute face-to-face grassroots actions by managerial sales strategies. As a result, we see more individualised participatory actions which do not aim at changing any existing political institutions into more socially just ones. Individualised civic participation changes the traditional forms and motives of political solidarity as well as political mobilisation; as a result, democratic citizenry experiences are reduced to political participation.

This paper examines the new forms of political participation, whose central feature is not a gathering power of political solidarity, but a chequebook participation that developed in recent decades as a result of neoliberal policies. This so called "professionalised" approach overtakes traditional grassroots activists' practises. Political solidarity – one of the three essential elements of democracy (together with freedom and equality) – has been gradually replaced by managerial techniques resulting in a deepening deficit of democracy. One of the reasons behind the changing trends in political participation is the so-called professionalisation of the non-governmental sector, when hired administrators substitute face-to-face grassroots actions by managerial sales strategies. As a result, we see more individualised participatory actions which do not aim at changing any existing political institutions into more socially just ones. Individualised civic participation changes the traditional forms and motives of political solidarity as well as political mobilisation; as a result, democratic citizenry experiences are reduced to political participation.

For many years, the scholarship of urban politics has drifted away from political science, both theoretically and methodologically. In this article, we systematically examine the boundary between urban political studies and the broader discipline of political science through an analysis of journal citations. We find that the analogy of a "black hole" is apt: No ideas escape the event horizon surrounding urban politics; furthermore, ideas from outside rarely penetrate the subfield's borders. Our evidence suggests that this is mostly due to a stunted solipsism that has engulfed too much of urban politics, but some of the blame must rest with the increasing insularity of political science. We suggest a research agenda that highlights the inherent dynamism in urban politics, and conclude with an endorsement of framework-driven citation analysis as a method of examining the flow of ideas across scholarly boundaries.

Sexist treatment of women's issues by Black and New Left activists sparked the creation of radical feminism. Looks at feminism's critique of the research methods, related methodology and underpinning conceptual assumptions of political science. Argues that, if nothing else, the feminist critique has highlighted the arbitrariness and unacknowledged partiality of the traditional framework. (SJK)

Muhammadiyah is an interest group and its elites cannot remain silent in politics after interpreting situations other than that the Muhammadiyah elite does not interfere in politics but its members are involved in politics. The political attitude of the Muhammadiyah elite organisations is unclear in every election whether the presidential election, PILKADA or legislative elections, because of the fragmentation of the Muhammadiyah elite. The formulation of the problem in this study is how is the movement of the Muhammadiyah Ponorogo elite in the 2019 election? The question derived from the formulation of the problem above is first, who is included in the elite Muhammadiyah organisation in Ponorogo? Second, what is the tendency of elite movement? Third, what factors influenced the movement of the Muhammadiyah elite in the 2019 elections? Fourth, what is the motivation of Muhammadiyah's elite organisation in Ponorogo in making organisational policy decisions to determine the direction of the organisation's political movements, specifically religious organisations? The type of research used is descriptive qualitative in which the determination of informants using purposive sampling and the method of collecting data by observation, interview or document review. This study concludes that there is a political package determined by the Muhammadiyah Central Leadership and the Muhammadiyah Regional Leadership, and at the Regional Leadership level only socialises with the citizens. The influential elite group is at the central and regional level, while no figures outside the core management have a big influence in determining the organisational policies of the Muhammadiyah. Rationality, in determining candidates, is rationality over where the central and regional leaders hold full control over the choices that must be accepted by the regional leaders and the residents.

This paper addresses the relationship between political legitimacy arising from a link with the 'will of the people', and political legitimacy arising from beneficial consequences for them. Questioning the common assumption of an inherent trade-off between 'input' and 'output legitimacy', it suggests that the two necessarily go together, and that their relationship is continuously reconstructed through discursive contestation. These claims are first substantiated conceptually, in reference to the legitimacy literature in European Union (EU) Studies, which is situated in the broader fields of Political Theory and Comparative Politics. In a second step, the argument is developed on the grounds of empirical case material: an interpretive, non-quantitative reconstruction of the changing discourses on EU legitimacy by the European institutions from the 1950s to the early 2000s.