Contentious Politics: Hobbes, Machiavelli and Corporate Power

Democracy Futures Series, The Conversation (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Political protesters often don’t play by the rules. Think of the Occupy Movement, which brought lower Manhattan to a standstill in 2011 under the slogan, “We are the 99%”. Closer to home, think of the refugee activists who assisted a breakout from South Australia’s Woomera detention centre in 2002. Both are examples of contentious politics, or forms of political engagement outside the institutional channels of political decision-making. The democratic credentials of contentious politics are highly ambivalent. On the one hand, contentious politics appears to have insufficient respect for democratic decision. Protesters are often forceful, uncivil and rowdy, aiming to disproportionately influence policy. But shouldn’t proposals be put forward with civility through the proper channels? And shouldn’t their proponents accept with good grace if they are democratically rebuffed? A closer look at the history of political thought can provide us with the framework to assess the case for and against the democratic reasonableness of contentious politics.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
FIECPH
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-12-23
View other versions
Added to PP index
2020-12-23

Total views
24 ( #57,488 of 2,427,984 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
24 ( #30,798 of 2,427,984 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.