Non-domination and Political Institutions: The Contested Concept of Republican Democracy

Abstract

Following the republican revival of the last few decades, the ideal of freedom as non-domination has become an important point of convergence among republican theorists, especially among those associated with neo-Roman republicanism. Furthermore, all neo-Roman theorists argue that a legitimate republican polity in contemporary societies must take a democratic form to overcome the aristocratic and elitist features pervasive in classical and modern republicanism. This study argues that the emerging concept of republican democracy remains essentially contested despite the increasing agreement on the ideal of liberty being constitutive of the republican tradition. It posits that the meaning of the concept of republican democracy becomes unstable in the transition from the normative ideal to the institutional level of neo-republican reasoning, which is evidenced by the fact that neo-Roman theorists embrace the ideal of non-domination but disagree on the characteristics of the institutional design capable of realizing that ideal. To substantiate this argument, the study compares three recent models of democracy that are somehow associated with neo-Roman republicanism-the electoral-contestatory model, the political constitutionalism model, and the Machiavellian democracy model, championed by

Entre saída e voz: a renda básica na economia política do neorrepublicanismo

“…Um dos principais corolários do projeto de revitalização do republicanismo nas sociedades contemporâneas consiste na democratização de seus ideais e suas de suas instituições, o que requer a definitiva superação da herança oligárquica que pesa sobre essa tradição. É verdade que não há consenso sobre os requisitos institucionais para a democratização do republicanismo (SILVA, 2015). Seja como for, a universalização das condições materiais da liberdade, expressa na propriedade que cada cidadão deve dispor para suprir suas necessidades básicas e livrar-se da dependência material de terceiros, é um dos desenvolvimentos mais desafiadores do atual republican revival e o principal objetivo de uma economia política republicana.…”

A República Democrática De Maquiavel: Uma Crítica À Interpretação Anti-Institucionalista

“…E o fazem aceitando as formulações mais abstratas do florentino, enquanto ignoram as especificidades e os arranjos mais concretos descritos em suas obras principais, especialmente nos Discorsi. Entre os neorrepublicanos, tais críticas vêm dando ensejo a um intenso debate acerca dos contornos de teoria da democracia adequada ao ideal republicano, bem como acerca dos mecanismos institucionais específicos da democracia republicana (Silva, 2015b). Mc-Cormick argumenta que Maquiavel propugnava um arranjo institucional orientado à atribuição de poder ao povo em detrimento das elites.…”

Resolving The Democratic Dilemma: Contestation, Anti-Power and Democracy

“…In the previous one, representatives vote to reflect how citizens would have done if they could have gathered all together, whereas here votes are consequences of what the representatives believe to be the dispositions of the constituents (Pettit 2012;197-202). This latter has three main advantages: it is more likely to enhance the basic freedoms necessary for people to be politically active; it has a greater capacity to generate and test alternative policies and it is also less likely to violate the principle of non-domination, since it lacks the concentration of powers of the indicative one (Silva 2015;13-15).…”

“…Bellamy himself who claims that he esteems the republican concept of freedom more than the liberal one. Even though the two ideals both rely on a strong concept of independence, Bellamy criticizes non-interference in two regards (Silva 2015;16-17).…”

“…Bellamy argues that the best way to defend the people's non-domination is by enhancing institutionally what he calls the ars rhetorica of "hearing the other side" (Silva 2015;20). This view does not consider society as composed by separate social groups to each of which we should give an independent institutional power.…”