If Liberal Democracy is about anything it is surely about applying the lessons of the past to the present.
Not exact matches
If the Church were a
democracy, then the
liberal / political analogy would be perfect.
If Marxism and secular ideologies of
liberal democracy were turning points, the collapse of socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe has been historic too.
He expressed the concern that
liberal democracy becomes vulnerable
if it loses touch with deeper metaphysical warrants.
But
if endowments are conceived solely as instruments, rather than equal partners with the state in pursuit of the public good, then the classic principle of private association in
liberal democracies has been lost, for instrumentality implies that government alone is the public good's ultimate arbiter.
If we take dignity as a standard for good governance, it exposes the numerous inadvertencies in
liberal democracies.
However,
if Russia does want to harm the West, and in particular
if it desires the weakening of NATO and Western
liberal democracy, Trump's election may not herald a fundamental change in relations, but merely make them more febrile and high risk.
If Europeans are unable to look at the failings of their system and muster the determination to tackle them, they will not only face a dismal future, but they will have done a grave disservice to
liberal democracy around the world.
Blair's project is to dismantle the Labour Party as a party based on the unions, to destroy the elements of
democracy which exist within the party and to transform the British political party system, through electoral reform, to make possible a long - term governmental alliance with the
Liberal Democrats and,
if possible, the Heseltine - Clarke wing of the Tory Party.
If this is all that republicanism has to offer then it becomes barely distinguishable from existing
liberal democracies.
If Vladimir Putin wants to destroy American
democracy, Bannon wants to destroy American culture by recharging dreary narratives that dictate American bugaboos, like «
liberal Hollywood» and the «Lamestream Media.»
For onlookers of democratic politics, rather than assuming a trajectory in which
democracy (by which too many onlookers assume Western
liberal democracy) prevails, it is prudent to heed the contested nature of this concept and note that among populations that are deeply divided on the separation of religion and state,
if some form of
democracy does arise once the dust settles it will by virtue of the democratic process likely take place in between the essentialized and polarizing categories — those «secular» and «Islamist» conceptions — that are so prevalently and popularly discussed in popular discourse and the media.
Insofar as a social movement is «an organized, sustained, self - conscious challenge to existing authorities» (Tilly, 1984), the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions included a multiplicity of informal and formal institutions and alliances: students, unions, professionals, religious groups, etc.And while the master frames calling for the ouster of Mubarak and Ben Ali were no doubt unifying discursive devices that were readily supported by most
if not all of the protestors, secondary frames — calls for
democracy, social justice, freedom, and dignity — presented significant points of divergence not only in and between Islamist and non-Islamist groups, but between the secular -
liberal youth who are credited with initiating the mass protests in the first place.
Yet in a
liberal democracy such as the United States, the proper ordering of those mechanisms is beset by paradox:
if free citizens are to rule the state, does the state have a legitimate role in shaping their values and beliefs via its public schools, universities, and other institutions?
If the corporations win,
liberal democracy will come to an end.