Constitutional Democratic Governance
5 Dissenting Political Voices
Part 3 (Observation 5-9)
by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT
Consider five socio-political theorists:
NOAM CHOMSKY
Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky
"...Chomsky remains a leading critic of U.S. foreign policy, contemporary capitalism, U.S. involvement and Israel's role in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and mass media. Chomsky and his ideas remain highly influential in the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist movements."
The United States Is a Frightening Country
by Noam Chomsky
"...In 2010, Taylor said multiculturalism was a work in progress that faced challenges. He identified tackling Islamophobia in Canada as the next challenge. In his 2020 book Reconstructing Democracy he, together with Patrizia Nanz and Madeleine Beaubien Taylor, uses local examples to describe how democracies in transformation might be revitalized by involving citizenship."
Charles Taylor's A Secular Age Explained:
What Conservatives Get Wrong about Secularism
by Jason W Blakely
Charles Taylor Lecture: Disenchantment and Secularity
held at The Berkley Center
SLAVOJ ZIZEK
Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavoj_%C5%BDi%C5%BEek
I'm horrified at him [Trump]. I'm just thinking that Hillary is the true danger. ... if Trump wins, both big parties, Republicans and Democratics, would have to return to basics, rethink themselves, and maybe some things can happen there. That's my desperate, very desperate hope, that if Trump wins—listen, America is not a dictatorial state, he will not introduce Fascism—but it will be a kind of big awakening. New political processes will be set in motion, will be triggered. But I'm well aware that things are very dangerous here ... I'm just aware that Hillary stands for this absolute inertia, the most dangerous one. Because she is a cold warrior, and so on, connected with banks, pretending to be socially progressive.[87]
These views were derisively characterised as accelerationist by Left Voice,[88] and were labelled "regressive" by Noam Chomsky.[89]
In 2019 and 2020, Žižek defended his views,[90] saying that Trump's election "created, for the first time in I don't know how many decades, a true American left", citing the boost it gave Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.[54]
However, regarding the 2020 United States presidential election, Žižek reported himself "tempted by changing his position", saying "Trump is a little too much".[54] In another interview, he stood by his 2016 "wager" that Trump's election would lead to a socialist reaction ("maybe I was right"), but claimed that "now with coronavirus: no, no—no Trump. ... difficult as it is for me to say this, but now I would say 'Biden better than Trump', although he is far from ideal."[91] In his 2022 book, Heaven in Disorder, Žižek continued to express a preference for Joe Biden over Donald Trump, stating "Trump was corroding the ethical substance of our lives", while Biden lies and represents big capital more politely.[92]
Philosopher Slavoj Žižek on the re-election of
Donald Trump & his fears for Western values
held at the OxfordUnion
Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt
While Arendt never developed a systematic political theory and her writing does not easily lend itself to categorization, the tradition of thought most closely identified with Arendt is that of civic republicanism, from Aristotle to Tocqueville. Her political concept is centered around active citizenship that emphasizes civic engagement and collective deliberation.[5] She believed that no matter how bad, government could never succeed in extinguishing human freedom, despite holding that modern societies frequently retreat from democratic freedom with its inherent disorder for the relative comfort of administrative bureaucracy. Some have claimed her political legacy is her strong defence of freedom in the face of an increasingly less than free world.[29] She does not adhere to a single systematic philosophy, but rather spans a range of subjects covering totalitarianism, revolution, the nature of freedom, and the faculties of thought and judgment.
While she is best known for her work on "dark times",[ai] the nature of totalitarianism and evil, she imbued this with a spark of hope and confidence in the nature of Mankind:
That even in the darkest of times we have the right to expect some illumination, and that such illumination might well come less from theories and concepts than from the uncertain, flickering, and often weak light that some men and women, in their lives and their works, will kindle under almost all circumstances and shed over the time span that was given to them. Men in Dark Times (1968)
Hannah Arendt's Philosophy on Totalitarianism
by Turtleneck Philosophy
WILLIAM CONNOLLY
Over the course of the last four decades Connolly has helped to remake the theory of pluralism. Connolly challenges older theories of pluralism by arguing for pluralization as a goal rather than as a state of affairs. Connolly's argument for the "multiplication of factions" follows James Madison's logic in engaging groups, constituencies, and voters at both the micro and macro level. Essentially, he has shifted the theory from a conservative theory of order, to a progressive theory of democratic contestation and engagement. By engaging Nietzsche and Foucault, Connolly explores the nature of democratic contestation and its relation to pluralism. A more comprehensive look on pluralism can be found in the work Pluralism.
"Facing the Planetary" by William Connolly
(part 1-2)
by Footnotes2Plato
"Facing the Planetary" by William Connolly
(part 2-2)
by Footnotes2Plato
* * * * * *
Observation 5
How would each respond? Let's start with Noam Chomsky.
ChatGPT
Noam Chomsky would likely offer a deeply critical analysis, emphasizing systemic issues and historical patterns. Here's how he might respond:
No comments:
Post a Comment