Extragenitale Syphilisinfection an der Wangenschleimhaut

Böhm, I.

doi:10.1007/bf01933574

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…: 144f.) or, more specifically, by the rules of private or civil law that constitute the Privatrechtsgesellschaft (Böhm, 1980, 1989), the civil law society 3 . Private autonomy means autonomy of the individual within the limits of the rules of law , rules that define the content of property rights and that set limits to the freedom of contract.…”

Section: Liberalism and Private Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…30On this issue see also Hayek (1978b: 107f., 1978d: 157, 2001: 85, 87). The founders of the Freiburg School of Ordoliberalism (see Vanberg, 2001c), Walter Eucken and Franz Böhm, argued likewise that the seemingly ‘strong’ interventionist state is in fact a weak state, ‘a plaything in the hands of interest groups’ (Eucken, 1990: 326; Böhm, 1980: 258).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the complementarity of liberalism and democracy – a reading of F.A. Hayek and J.M. Buchanan

Vanberg

2008

Journal of Institutional Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The principal claim of this paper is that liberalism and democracy are not only compatible ideals, as F.A. Hayek has suggested, but rather complementary ideals. The argument in support of this claim is based on a distinction between three different levels at which liberalism and democracy can be compared, the level of their institutional embodiment, the level of their principal ideals, and the level of their underlying normative premise. It is argued that liberalism and democracy share as their common normative foundation the principle of individual sovereignty, and that their respective core ideals, the liberal principle of private autonomy and the democratic principle of citizen sovereignty, can be best understood as applications of the ideal of individual sovereignty to the realm of the private law society on the one side and to the ‘public’ realm of collective-political choice on the other.

show abstract

Section: Liberalism and Private Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%