European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 85

On April 01 2015 05:19 cLutZ wrote:
Rousseau is one of the ones I was talking about :-/

edit:

That has been more or less explicitly rejected by Europeans from this thread.

Rousseau claimed that the state of nature was a primitive condition without law or morality, which human beings left for the benefits and necessity of cooperation. As society developed, division of labor and private property required the human race to adopt institutions of law. In the degenerate phase of society, man is prone to be in frequent competition with his fellow men while also becoming increasingly dependent on them. This double pressure threatens both his survival and his freedom.

According to Rousseau, by joining together into civil society through the social contract and abandoning their claims of natural right, individuals can both preserve themselves and remain free. This is because submission to the authority of the general will of the people as a whole guarantees individuals against being subordinated to the wills of others and also ensures that they obey themselves because they are, collectively, the authors of the law.

Although Rousseau argues that sovereignty (or the power to make the laws) should be in the hands of the people, he also makes a sharp distinction between the sovereign and the government. The government is composed of magistrates, charged with implementing and enforcing the general will. The "sovereign" is the rule of law, ideally decided on by direct democracy in an assembly.

On April 01 2015 05:48 WhiteDog wrote:

How ? I'd say most of the point that were made against you were rousseauist more or less.
Don't tell me Rousseau is critic of the state please, don't tell me that, I beg you.

On April 01 2015 06:10 always_winter wrote:
Rousseau's theoretical doctrine is of particular significance in regard to the issue of globalization. The Social Contract posits the General Will is most easily exercised in small, relatively homogenous states; much like the socio-political landscape of Europe. It is from this basis that the General Will is regarded, simply, as majority rule as it is wholly representative of the constituency. It is from this same basis that democracy is legitimized in the eyes of its people.

As the constituency becomes increasingly heterogeneous, however, the socio-economic balance is shifted, creating turmoil within the political system as a wide spectrum of beliefs and viewpoints are injected into a previously uniform state culture. The majority is quickly diminished, thereby diminishing acquiescence to the General Will and threatening the populist legitimacy of the democratic state.

On April 01 2015 06:10 always_winter wrote:
Rousseau's theoretical doctrine is of particular significance in regard to the issue of globalization. The Social Contract posits the General Will is most easily exercised in small, relatively homogenous states; much like the socio-political landscape of Europe. It is from this basis that the General Will is regarded, simply, as majority rule as it is wholly representative of the constituency. It is from this same basis that democracy is legitimized in the eyes of its people.

As the constituency becomes increasingly heterogeneous, however, the socio-economic balance is shifted, creating turmoil within the political system as a wide spectrum of beliefs and viewpoints are injected into a previously uniform state culture. The majority is quickly diminished, thereby diminishing acquiescence to the General Will and threatening the populist legitimacy of the democratic state.

On April 01 2015 07:32 puerk wrote:
first you complain about stupid europeans missrepresenting the US and now you trott out the meme that europe is "homogeneous"
which is in the context of this discussion just a dog whistle for racists: look they have no blacks that is why their welfare states did not fail horribly yet.

On April 01 2015 08:00 Velr wrote:
americans make a diffrence between "europeans" and "latinos".

People in euroep don't. Italians and Spaniards/Portugese/whogivesashit are just as fucking white as we (north/westaern and eastern until a certain degree europeans?) are... Check your racism. There wasn't even a distinction before you guys "took" the debate.

I don't know.. But before i came to TL and other internet media.. people from spain were spanish, people from italy were italic and people from greece were greece... Now they are "latinos" which comes with all the bad stuff the white power us citizens fed me.. I feel filthiy for kinda falling for it... shame on you.

On April 01 2015 22:50 phil.ipp wrote:
haha Velr you killed the discussion, now its like: what were we talking about?