PAPM 2002 Study Notes PDF

Brief PAPM 2002 study notes Briefly explain three feminist critiques of liberalism. (3 marks) Feminist Critiques of Liberalism: The public-private sphere split is a key target of feminist critique. Liberalism traditionally separates the public sphere (politics, work) from...

Brief PAPM 2002 study notes Briefly explain three feminist critiques of liberalism. (3 marks) Feminist Critiques of Liberalism: The public-private sphere split is a key target of feminist critique. Liberalism traditionally separates the public sphere (politics, work) from the private sphere (home, family), considering the latter as outside the realm of political concern. Feminists argue that this division is not natural or neutral, but rather masks power relations within the private sphere. These power dynamics, often characterized by gender inequality, affect women's ability to participate fully and equally in the public sphere. The split makes the private sphere seem pre-political and natural, obscuring the power imbalances that exist within it. By ignoring the private sphere, liberalism fails to address how power operates in this domain and how it impacts women’s lives. Liberalism's focus on the individual is critiqued for being based on masculine norms and standards, requiring women to adapt to them. The liberal idea of equality is often abstract, assuming a universal individual that does not take into account differences based on gender and other social locations. A feminist approach challenges this individualistic ontology, emphasizing the relational aspects of human nature. Feminist theory stresses that human beings are not isolated individuals but are always in relation with others3. This relational perspective leads to an understanding of power that takes into account how it operates across relationships. Liberalism does not adequately address care. By excluding considerations of care, liberalism fails to address the fundamental concerns of democratic citizens, especially since care responsibilities are not distributed democratically. Care, as defined broadly, includes everything we do to maintain, continue, and repair our world, including our bodies, ourselves, and our environment. A feminist perspective emphasizes the importance of care as a central value for democracies. The democratic theory should include the assignment of care responsibilities. The idea of "caring with" requires that caring needs and how they are met be consistent with democratic commitments to justice, equality, and freedom for all. Briefly explain two of Charles Mills’ critiques of liberalism. (2 marks) Charles Mills' Critiques of Liberalism: ○ Liberalism has been historically racialized. Mills contends that liberalism, and political philosophy more generally, are “white” in their construction of the canon and their neglect of racial justice. The historical racialization of liberalism is rarely discussed in contemporary political debates. He argues that the social  contract, which is central to liberal thought, has been underpinned by race from the outset, creating a “racial contract” that has excluded non-white people. This racial contract, according to Mills, has shaped the sense of crucial terms and created a particular model of rights-bearers. Liberalism ignores racial exploitation. Liberalism's concepts of fairness, rights, entitlement, and justice are undermined by its failure to address racial exploitation. Mills argues that liberalism's emphasis on individual rights and freedoms has often served to obscure or justify the unequal treatment of people of colour. A truly just society requires that the historical legacy of racial exploitation be addressed. The "domination contract" should be used as a "device of representation" to expose the centrality of racial exploitation to the American polity and its implications for social justice. What is the difference between “heroic” and “dangerous” demagoguery, according to Mercieca (2019)? Briefly explain two of the four techniques used by “dangerous” demagogues to undermine public debate, with reference to examples. (2 marks) Demagoguery: a. According to Mercieca (2019), the key difference between "heroic" and "dangerous" demagoguery lies in accountability. Heroic demagogues engage in public deliberation, even if they disagree with others. They allow themselves to be held accountable for their words and actions and affirm human dignity, while dangerous demagogues use "weaponized communication" to avoid accountability. Dangerous demagogues may use intimidation to prevent their opponents from holding them accountable. They may also use threats of violence against their opponents. b. Two techniques used by "dangerous" demagogues to undermine public debate. i. Denying the legitimacy of political opponents: Dangerous demagogues use ad hominem attacks to portray their opposition as illegitimate. They attack their opponents personally instead of engaging with their ideas. They also use reification to depict opponents as nonhuman, or as objects who are not entitled to basic rights. This dehumanization is a step towards tolerating or encouraging violence against their opponents. For example, a dangerous demagogue might label their opponents as "enemies of the people." ii. Weak commitment, or rejection of, rules of public deliberation: Dangerous demagogues will use techniques like paralipsis or tu quoque. Paralipsis is when a speaker highlights something by claiming they will not speak about it. For example, a demagogue may say something like "I won't say that my opponent is corrupt" which highlights that idea without  having to defend the claim. Tu quoque is a technique in which a speaker attacks an opponent’s behaviour as inconsistent. For example, they may point out that their opponent does not follow the same rules they are trying to impose. Briefly explain three characteristics of populism Characteristics of Populism: Direct relationship between a leader and "good" people: Populism establishes a direct link between a leader and a segment of society that the leader defines as the "right" or "good" people. This relationship often bypasses traditional intermediary institutions such as political parties, the media, and other civil society organizations. The populist leader claims to represent the "real people," contrasting them with a corrupt elite. This direct connection is often cultivated through mass rallies, social media, and other forms of direct communication. Rejection of intermediary bodies: Populism weakens or dismisses intermediary bodies such as political parties, established media, and institutional checks on political power. Populist leaders claim that these institutions are part of the corrupt elite and do not represent the "real people". Populists often seek to dismantle these institutions or reduce their influence, thus increasing the power of the leader. This can be seen as a "revolt against intermediary bodies". Emphasis on the will of the majority: Populism emphasizes the authority of the audience, promoting a direct translation of popular opinion into decisions. This can lead to intolerance of dissent and a disregard for pluralism. Populist leaders claim to have a direct mandate from the people and often bypass normal democratic procedures. They present themselves as the embodiment of the people's will, which can be used to justify actions that are harmful to minority groups or that undermine democratic norms. The populist leader claims to represent the volonté générale and tends to denigrate respect for civil rights. Briefly explain one difference between fascism and populism. Difference between Fascism and Populism: ○ Fascism destroys democracy, suspending elections and using violence against its citizens. Fascist regimes violently repress the opposition and restrict basic rights of speech and association. They also often create a totalitarian state that attempts to control all aspects of citizens’ lives. Populism, on the other hand, generally operates within the existing democratic structure, although it may transform or disfigure it. Populists do not necessarily suspend elections, though they may alter the rules to stay in power. They may also weaken the separation of powers, disfigure the rule of law, and attack basic rights. It is important to note that populism can be a step towards fascism; by disfiguring democracy, populism may create conditions that make it easier for a country to transition towards authoritarianism.