Journals / Ardahan Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 3

Rawls’ Conceptions of Constitutional Consensus and Overlapping Consensus in View of the Democratization Literature

Demokratikleşme Literatürü Çerçevesinde Rawls’un Anayasal Uzlaşma ve Örtüşen Görüş Birliği Kavramları

Pages
27–47
Publication Date
2016-04-15
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

And the third argument is that Rawls’ conception of overlapping consensus corresponds to ‘maximalist’ and ‘positive’ democratic consolidation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this article, Rawls’ conceptions of constitutional consensus and overlapping consensus are analyzed and evaluatedin relation to the democratization literature.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Although Rawls wrote as a political thinker and didnot make explicit references to the democratization literature in his writings, one can discern a parallel between the democratization literature and Rawls’ depiction of the stages for reaching an overlapping consensus.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:And the third argument is that Rawls’ conception of overlapping consensus corresponds to ‘maximalist’ and ‘positive’ democratic consolidation.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:John Rawls · anayasal uzlaşma · örtüşen görüş birliği

Abstract

In this article, Rawls’ conceptions of constitutional consensus and overlapping consensus are analyzed and evaluatedin relation to the democratization literature. Although Rawls wrote as a political thinker and didnot make explicit references to the democratization literature in his writings, one can discern a parallel between the democratization literature and Rawls’ depiction of the stages for reaching an overlapping consensus. Regarding the connections between democratization literature and Rawls’ conceptions of constitutional consensus and overlapping consensus, three conclusions are put forth in the article. The first is that Rawls’ conception of the initial stage of constitutional consensus, which is practically a modus vivendi, corresponds to ‘democratic transition.’ The second argument is that Rawls’ conception of (finalized) constitutional consensus corresponds to ‘minimalist’ and ‘negative’ democratic consolidation. And the third argument is that Rawls’ conception of overlapping consensus corresponds to ‘maximalist’ and ‘positive’ democratic consolidation.

Özet

Bu makalede Rawls’un anayasal uzlaşma ve örtüşen görüş birliği kavramları, demokratikleşme literatürü çerçevesinde analiz edilip değerlendirilmiştir. Rawls bir siyaset düşünürü olarak yazmasına ve demokratikleşme literatürüne açık göndermelerde bulunmamasına ragmen, demokratikleşme literatürü ile Rawls’un örtüşen görüş birliğine ulaşmak için gerektiğini belirttiği aşamalar arasında bir paralellik gözlemlenmektedir. Makalede, demokratikleşme literatürüile Rawls’un anayasal uzlaşma ve örtüşen görüş birliği kavramları arasındaki bağlantılarla ilgili olarak üç temel tespit yapılmıştır. İlk olarak, Rawls’un bahsettiği, demokratik prosedürler üzerinde bir ‘anayasal uzlaşma’nın ilk aşamasının, ki bu yalnızca bir modus vivendi’dir, literatürdeki ‘demokrasiye geçiş’ kavramına karşılık geldiği tespit edilmiştir. İkinci olarak, anayasal uzlaşmanın nihai ve sonlandırılmış halinin ‘minimalist’ ve ‘negatif’ demokratik pekişmeye denk düştüğü; üçüncü olarak ise, ‘örtüşen görüş birliği’ kavramının ‘maksimalist’ ve ‘pozitif’ demokratik pekişmeye karşılık geldiği tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILDIZ, N. (2016). Rawls’ Conceptions of Constitutional Consensus and Overlapping Consensus in View of the Democratization Literature. Ardahan Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 3, 27–47. https://ajindex.com/articles/734714

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. ALMOND, Gabriel and VERBA, Sidney, (1963), “The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations”, Princeton University Press,
  2. Princeton. BURNELL, Peter, and CALVERT, Peter, (1999), ”The Resilience of Democracy: An Introduction,” Democratization 6(1), Oxfordshire. CARLSON, Neil, (2002), “The Institutional Design of Civil Society: Practical Roots of Constitutional Democracy” (Ph.D. proposal at Duke University), published at http://www.duke.edu/~nec/ps/diss/carlson_proposal_200203.pdf.
  3. CARTER, April, and STOKES, Geoffrey (Eds), (1998), “Liberal Democracy and Its Critics”, Polity Press,
  4. Oxford. DAHL, Robert A, (1971), “Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition”, Yale University Press,
  5. New Haven. DAHL, Robert, (1989), “Democracy and Its Critics”, Yale University Press,
  6. New Haven. DIAMOND, Larr, (1996), “Is the Third Wave Over?,” Journal of Democracy 7(3 ), p.33, Washington, DC. DIAMOND, Larry, (1999), “Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation”, Johns Hopkins Press,
  7. Baltimore. EASTON, David, (1975), “A Reassessment of the Concept of Political Support,” British Journal of Political Sciences, 5(4), Cambridge. GANBAT, Gamba, (2004), “The Mass Public and Democratic Politics in Mongolia.” Working Paper Series No:29, Asian Barometer Office, National Taiwan University and Academia Sinica. HUNTINGTON, Samuel, (1991), “The Third Wave. Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century”, University of Oklahoma Press,
  8. Norman. INGLEHART, Ronald, (1988), “The Renessaince of Political Culture,” American Political Science Review 82(4), Denton TX. KALDOR, Mary and VEJVODA, Ivan, (1997), “Democratization in Central and Eastern European Countries,” International Affairs 73(1), Malden USA. KLOSKO, George, (1993). “Rawls’ Political Philosophy and American Democracy,” American Political Science Review, 87(2), Washington, DCKnoxville. LINZ, Juan J. and STEPAN, Alfred, (1996), “Toward Consolidated Democracies,” Journal of Democracy 7(2), Washington, DC. LINZ, Juan, (1978), “The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes: Crisis, Breakdown, and Re-equilibration”, Johns Hopkins University Press,
  9. Baltimore. LIPSET, Seymour Martin, (1959), “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and olitical Legitimacy,” American Political Science Review53(1), Washington, DC. LIPSET, Seymour Martin, (1959), “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy,” American Political Science Review53(1), Washington, DC. LIPSET, Seymour Martin, (1960), “Politi