Subscribe to Read | $0.00
Join today and start reading your favorite books for Free!
Quick and Easy Sign Up!
It takes less then 1 minute to sign up, then you can enjoy Unlimited eBooks.
Join today and start reading your favorite books for Free!
Quick and Easy Sign Up!
It takes less then 1 minute to sign up, then you can enjoy Unlimited eBooks.
Read Anywhere and on Any Device!
Rate this book!
Write a review?
Kanadalı siyaset bilimci, sanki-Marksist Macpherson burjuva demokrasi teorilerini üç model altında incelemiş. Yazara göre 19. yüzyıldan önce bir liberal demokrasi teorisinden söz etmek mümkün değil. Platon'dan Rousseau'ya kadar tüm demokrasi teorileri, ekonomiyi ve siyaseti birbirinden ayırmadan demokrasiyi bir tür komünizm ya da en azından ekonomik sınıf ayrımlarının derinleşmesine izin verilmeyen bir sistem olarak tasarladılar.Ekonominin siyasetten ayrı düşünülmesi, sınıf ayrımlarının derinleş...
I discovered this work after it was assigned as an alternative textbook in lieu of David Held's "Models of Democracy" (for those who could get their hands on it - as it was out of print at the time) for an undergraduate political science course about 20 years ago. If there was ever a text that inspired me to become a political scientist - this was it. Need I say more?
Macpherson offers a short, concise, and a half-way useful way of looking at the development of democratic thought through his "models" of democracy.The first half of the books is fine, the first two models of democracy are very useful for the explication of the history of democratic thought, covering the earliest 'protective' model and the latter, more idealistic, 'developmental' model.Unfortunately, the book is badly dated and it is the second half that shows it most clearly: the third model is...
I found this essay too technical for a beginner, at least because it does not provide any clear definition of the theoretical elements the Author frequently uses (e.g democracy, capitalism, class, parliaments, etc.). Moreover the distinction of the models is kind of arbitrary. On the one hand it makes sense to begin with the first utilitarian generation but on the other he excludes plenty of theoreticians basically with no explanation.
https://neoplanodion.gr/2021/04/12/cr...
Terrible stuff. He claims that there are three models of democracy (with no evidence that these are or were mainstream views), two of those 'models' were formed by a group of three thinkers who were closely intertwined, two of whom being father and son and the other being a good friend of the other two. So to what extent are they different? The third model he barely explains and just kind of skims over. And of course, he looks only at two periods in two countries histories, rather than the vario...
Yes, I will be including books I’m reading for my graduate program in my “Read” list because otherwise I see no possible way for me to reach my reading goal. Plus it’s a boon I read so it counts!The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy, what a title. I enjoyed this book much more than I expected to, particularly the fact that it’s a Marxist historical analysis of the evolution of liberal democracy as I hadn’t read something of this sort before — I imagine that being from the United States has ser...
i only got to read sections of this, but it was really interesting... for political philosophy.
Some of the ideas that are put forward in this book are flawed but overall a good review of democratic models.
This book was wonderful, and I consider it a must-read for anyone who is truly interested in the history of America's experimental form of democracy -- liberal democracy. Read this to learn about how our nation grapples with the attempt to marry democracy with capitalism; the characteristics of each being inherently at odds with each other. Not only do you see a thorough, but concise history of each model of Liberal Democracy to date, but Macpherson proposes a future, broader concept of liberal
This is a great breakdown of the foundations of liberal democracy, starting with a chilling look at the utilitarianism of James Mill and Jeremy Benthem, and then to the less chilling John Stuart Mills. It's good to remember just what they thought of the poor and the working class, and how they just couldn't get away from the importance of the rich being able to keep everything they have, even when their theories seem to make a good case against that. But written in the 70s, it's an early and not...
