The article introduces the second part of a symposium, "The Crowd in the History of Political Thought," which is being published as a two-part special issue, and which explores visions of the role of the people and populism in the writings of past thinkers. The articles in this second part are by European scholars with disparate interests and approaches to the history of political thought. Populism proves difficult to define, partly because populist politicians evince different understandings of "the people" and the purpose of government. The liberal, democratic, and national visions of "the people" can be harmonious but can also become disharmonious. Untangling them by exploring how thinkers in the history of political thought distinguished between crowds and peoples can help us to better understand the ideological dynamics of our moment. Articles on Hobbes and Spinoza offer disparate accounts of the differences between peoples and crowds. Herder, by contrast, helps us understand the political self-determination of peoples, while Schmitt and Arendt offer rival visions of the tensions between democratic and liberal principles.
Introduction: The Crowd in the History of Political Thought—Visions of the People / Jaffe, Seth Nathan; Ferrer, Guillermo Graíño. - In: THE REVIEW OF POLITICS. - ISSN 0034-6705. - 85:4(2023), pp. 443-449. [10.1017/s0034670523000347]
Introduction: The Crowd in the History of Political Thought—Visions of the People
Jaffe, S. N.;
2023
Abstract
The article introduces the second part of a symposium, "The Crowd in the History of Political Thought," which is being published as a two-part special issue, and which explores visions of the role of the people and populism in the writings of past thinkers. The articles in this second part are by European scholars with disparate interests and approaches to the history of political thought. Populism proves difficult to define, partly because populist politicians evince different understandings of "the people" and the purpose of government. The liberal, democratic, and national visions of "the people" can be harmonious but can also become disharmonious. Untangling them by exploring how thinkers in the history of political thought distinguished between crowds and peoples can help us to better understand the ideological dynamics of our moment. Articles on Hobbes and Spinoza offer disparate accounts of the differences between peoples and crowds. Herder, by contrast, helps us understand the political self-determination of peoples, while Schmitt and Arendt offer rival visions of the tensions between democratic and liberal principles.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
1_introduction-the-crowd-in-the-history-of-political-thought_visions-of-the-people.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione dell'editore
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione
95.06 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
95.06 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.