جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "liberal democracy" در نشریات گروه "علوم سیاسی"

Afghanistan is a country with diverse ethnic minorities that have been in conflict with each other, without much emphasis on nationalism. Lack of social cohesion has led to the dominance of tribal leaders in the country. On the other hand, modern nation-state building has been introduced through the French Revolution and colonization in India. These two ideologies have resulted in a cultural shock, tug of war between tradition and modernity, and violence in Afghanistan. Nationalism, which introduces traditional values into modern clothing, is in conflict with liberalism, which emphasizes post-enlightenment ideology and development in Europe, but has not been able to bring development to Afghanistan. Nationalism has led to division and animosity between the various cultures and ethnic groups in Afghanistan, resulting in social conflicts, weak nationalism, and underdevelopment. Armed uprisings, the emergence of terrorist groups, foreign intervention, the destruction of infrastructure, and the collapse of the developmental mindset are some of the consequences of this underdevelopment. This sociological-historical research aims to answer the question of how the delay in the formation of nationalism affected the development and led to the collapse of the developmental mindset in Afghanistan. The hypothesis is that the delay in the formation of civic nationalism, weak separation of private and public spheres in the eighth constitutional law, lack of historical background to liberal teachings, the non-sociological function of global society, and continuous ethnic nationalism without regard to the past have contributed to this collapse.

The rise of the populist radical-right parties (PRRP) stands out as one of the most significant developments in Western democracies over the past two decades. This trend, seen as a challenging sign within democracy but against liberal democracy, highlights the mounting pressure faced by Western political regimes from forces and groups that diverge from the dominant political currents of the last two decades. More specifically, one of the trends in various regions of the EU is the fact that voters, disillusioned by traditional (EU) politics, are turning towards populist and extreme parties both on the left and the right. In this respect, the current research aims to address the question: What were the causes and underlying factors contributing to the rise of radical right parties to power in Europe over the last two decades?

Literature Review:

In Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe, Cas Mudde (2007) delved into the ideology of PRRPs. He identifies three core tenets, namely nationalism, authoritarianism, and populism, contending that PRRPs are not passive entities; rather, they are engaged in actively shaping their destiny within contemporary Western societies. In the article “Economic Insecurity and Demand of Populism in Europe,” Guiso et al. (2022) relied on the approach based on demand of populism to argue that market as well as government inefficiencies in providing security have eroded citizen trust in traditional political parties and institutions. The escalating threats of immigration and globalization have further heightened desperation and fear, contributing to the intensified demand for populist policies. Guiso et al. (2022) explain how this dual crisis, reflected in economic insecurity, systematically influences the demand for populism. In “Conditions Favouring Parties of the Extreme Right in Western Europe,” Jackman and Volpert (2017) conducted a comprehensive examination of systemic conditions influencing the electoral success of extreme right-wing parties in 16 Western European countries between 1970 and 1990. They concluded that factors such as the electoral system, party structure, and higher unemployment rates created a conducive environment for the emergence of such political movements. In addition, Dehshiri and Ghasemi (2015), in their article titled “Fourfold Crises and the Rise of the Radical Right in Europe,” posit that the four crises (i.e., resource distribution, representation, identity, and immigration) played an undeniable role in shaping the radical right movement in Europe.The review of the literature shows different vantage points used to examine the causes, contexts, and consequences of the rise of radical right parties to power. There is a focus on particular aspects such as the electoral system, party structure, identity, and immigration. The novelty of the present research lies in its comprehensive approach based on supply and demand of populism, which explores a combination of socio-economic and political motivations and variables that impact the rise of radical right parties in European countries.

The present research used the supply and demand of populism as the framework to conduct a bottom-up and top-down analysis of the rise of radical right parties in Europe during 2008–2018.

Using the supply and demand of populism, the research can shed light on different dimensions of the rise of PRRPs in Europe during 2008–2018. On the demand side of populism, the ineffectiveness of governments in managing the financial crisis—often marked by cost reduction, tax increases, and rising unemployment—created the fertile ground for populist tendencies, including anti-immigrant sentiment, xenophobia, Euroscepticism, and nationalism. Meanwhile, the influx of immigrants into Europe, coupled with the adoption of multiculturalism in sociocultural spheres and globalization in the economic realm, could have contributed to the emergence and resurgence of radical right parties. On the supply side of populism, institutional mechanisms and political strategies (e.g., the nature of the electoral system, party ideologies, organizational structures of parties, and party leadership), alongside the influence of messages, rhetoric, and media propaganda, further laid the ground for the rise of radical right parties to power.

Relying on the supply and demand of populism as the framework, the present research demonstrated that economic and sociocultural demands and dissatisfactions on the demand side (bottom-up approach), coupled with the political and institutional strategies and mechanisms employed by populist statesmen and parties on the supply side of populism (top-down approach), prompted European voters to turn towards radical right leaders and parties. These conditions could foster the political mobilization of citizens by these parties, ultimately resulting in their rise to power, particularly between 2008 and 2018. Following the disorders such as the 2008 economic crisis, the 2014 terrorist crisis, the immigration crisis after 2015, and the ensuing sociocultural dissatisfaction, populist parties and leaders capitalized on the political opportunities available in the populism market, emerging as key players in the political arena. Concerning the supply of populism, radical right parties successfully provided the narratives necessary for political mobilization around shared concerns. They attracted the majority of votes by leveraging legal and institutional mechanisms (such as elections, media, and the unique leadership capabilities), ultimately securing political power.

Liberal Democracy, with its conflicting combination of Individualistic liberalism and Collectivist democracy and by preferring Individual interests over Collective interests, has exposed itself to a number of crises, including a political crisis that seems to be rooted in a conflict of interest between the people and the ruling elite. In the cofntext of Thomas Spriggens' theory of crisis, this article argues that, first, issues such as prioritizing individual freedoms and rights over democracy and collective rights, as well as the monopoly of political parties and their becoming state and cartel parties, are the most important signs. There are political crises in liberal democracies. Secondly, this crisis is the result of a conflict of interests between the votes (people) and the heads (ruling elites), and finally, the religious democracy based on the principle of Guardianship of the Islamic jurist, both in theory and in practice, is a response to these crises.

The Historical roots of liberal international order goes back to after the Second World War. Nowadays, it is faced with the problem of decline. While this issue is a multi-layered debate in terms of content, it is also a controversial and controversial issue among thinkers and theoreticians in the field of international relations. Based on this, the current research seeks to answer the main question, why is the international liberal order declining? This research using the theoretical approaches of liberalism in international relations, including the theories of democratic peace,  economic interdependence as well as neoliberal institutionalism as a theoretical research framework is based on the hypothesis that the weakening and degeneration of the triple pillars of the liberal order, including liberal democracy, global free trade, and various international institutions and regimes, have caused the decline of the liberal international order. So that the weakening of the three pillars of the liberal international order has caused the foundation based on political and economic liberalism of this order to be destroyed from within, and as a result, the unique components of the liberal international order will face a serious challenge. Based on historical evidence, this argument can be made. In the meantime, the United States of America has played an important role in the decline of the pillars and components of the liberal order over many years and decades, contrary to some common inferences and stereotypes.

In the current research, it is tried to explain the concept of expediency and examine its application in the electoral process of the two systems of Islamic revolution and liberal democracy. And on this basis, while explaining the structure and components of expediency in Shia jurisprudence and comparing it with the philosophy of the liberalism system, let's explore the nature of the differences, similarities and of course the results of these two approaches.In this work, which is based on the structural analysis and investigation of these two government systems, we found that the explanation of expediency in these two discourses was accompanied by complications and components that ultimately led to the formation of elections. In the Velayat al-Faqih system, this is the ruling of the government that determines the establishment of institutions and the regulation of events in elections, and its ultimate goal is to preserv

The question of “what is the good?” was the main characteristic of the Socratic political philosophy. However, the modern political philosophy had to pass this question and like its enemy (namely revealed theology) present a definite and tangible definition of “the good”. In other words, they had to show that philosophy, in addition to being the authoritative source of knowledge, can and must be the basis for promoting human life and a guide for attaining the good in practice. The role of Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Spinoza from this point of view is so prominent. It seems that the good they defended, was the true origin of the values of a liberal democratic regime. These philosophers recognized that the necessity of the dogmatic definition of the good necessitates a theological-rhetorical expression to persuade the addresses. Therefore, without comprehending this theological-rhetorical backbone, the values of a liberal democratic regime cannot be understood completely. The modern political philosophy, on other hand, is the forbear of modern political science that its main subject is behavior and action of the citizens in a liberal democratic regime. Therefore, we can say that modern political science cannot be comprehended completely without contemplating on the ambivalent effort of these philosophers: on the one hand, their theological defense of the liberal democratic values, and on the other hand, their defense of a new scientific politics distinguished radically from ancient political knowledge.

In the 21st century, artificial intelligence has affected the political and social life of most people in the world. In the West, too, increased oversight of citizens under the pretext of law enforcement is one of the most important areas of e-government intervention, undermining the claims of most modern Western philosophers to guarantee individual freedom based on empirical science and liberal democratic values. As the Corona virus spread, Western governments used artificial intelligence to control the Corona virus and monitor law enforcement, revealing a kind of digital tyranny. For example, Western governments use artificial intelligence technology to control individual behavior under the pretext of preventing and controlling the corona virus. Accordingly, the present article seeks to use a descriptive and library method to answer how the most important part of Western political philosophy, which is individual freedom, can be restricted through e-government to lead to digital authoritarianism. Findings show that Western governments have accelerated the transition from liberal democracy to digital authoritarianism by using digital technologies and encouraging citizens to self-censor, preventive control, violate social credibility, private intervention, and legitimize machine life.

Political rivalry as a peaceful strategy of shift of power in modern politics is an established fact. This concept in liberalism has been formulated on certain principles and grounds. The present article, while studying the principles and grounds of political rivalry in liberal democracy, tries to level criticism at them in order to challenge the political rivalry which emerge from these principles and grounds. Drawing upon an analytic-inferential method, the findings from the library data have come to this conclusion that as liberal democracy has degraded from the requisites of teleological reason into the carnal desires in its task of explaining rights and values, it carries with it certain consequences the most important of which in the realm of political rivalry is that the political rivalries are not regarded as dependent on the ápriori values and they are independent of the wills and desires of the individuals and this independency brings about evil consequences for liberal democracy. Key words liberalism, principles of democracy, liberal democracy, political rivalry. 'The Study and Criticism of Political Rivalry in Liberal Democracy :by Dāwūd Taqilū Political rivalry as a peaceful strategy of shift of power in modern politics is an established fact. This concept in liberalism has been formulated on certain principles and grounds. The present article, while studying the principles and grounds of political rivalry in liberal democracy, tries to level criticism at them in order to challenge the political rivalry which emerge from these principles and grounds. Drawing upon an analytic-inferential method, the findings from the library data have come to this conclusion that as liberal democracy has degraded from the requisites of teleological reason into the carnal desires in its task of explaining rights and values, it carries with it certain consequences the most important of which in the realm of political rivalry is that the political rivalries are not regarded as dependent on the ápriori values and they are independent of the wills and desires of the individuals and this independency brings about evil consequences for liberal democracy.

Developments, movements and revolutionary-social uprisings of Muslims in the Arab Middle East and North Africa such as Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Bahrain, Yemen and other important regions of the Islamic world from 2010 to the present based on various perspectives and from different angles It has attracted the attention of analysts, thinkers and theorists. In fact, different attitudes, including Islamic, liberal, and nationalist, have studied, analyzed the nature, and theorized about these developments from different angles. As some of the following theories of pro-democracy, liberal democracy, Arab Spring and human awakening and others in the form of Salafism and Islamic radicalism try to explain and analyze this issue. The results and findings of the present study indicate that the theory of Islamic awakening in comparison with rival theories is the only theory that can explain the reality of these revolutionary events in terms of structure, epistemology-ideology and behavior and the real intentions and goals of this Analyze popular Islamic uprisings.

Since the corona virus epidemic, various theories and attitudes have been proposed about the effects of corona on the world system. Of course, the larger the corona, the greater the effect. Although these attitudes and assessments have been presented in Corona's epidemic space, they reflect some of the realities of global society, especially the liberal system of democracy and capitalism. In fact, these assessments are subject to probability and conjecture. On the other hand, some approaches face political and unilateralism. In general, the main purpose and question of this study is to examine the effects of corona on the structures of the current world. Corona's influence on the world system can be seen in the context of optimistic, pessimistic, and realistic attitudes. In this regard, it could be pointed the decline of liberal democracy, the end of capitalism, the retreat from globalization, the decline of American power, the rise of bioterrorism in the world, the new polarization in the world.

After World War II, the new world order was based on the discourse of liberal democracy, and the great powers sought to dominate all societies as the sole thought and model of governance, and even Francis Fukuyama spoke of the end of history and the rule of liberal democracies. Brought up. With the victory of the Islamic Revolution, the discourse of Shiite Islam based on the teachings of Mahdism emerged as the third current in the world, which gradually created challenges for the discourse of liberal democracy. These two discourses, each based on a number of different and contradictory principles and components, led to different reactions in the Corona crisis from systems influenced by these two discourses, which gave meaning to life, social resilience, and calmed society. And the people's help to the health system and the governmental and governmental institutions in controlling it and guiding the society appeared. Using the analysis of Laclau and Mouffe's discourse, the present article, while comparing the floating and central signs of these two discourses, examines the distinction between these two discourses in the face of the Corona crisis and shows that serious crises shake the foundations of Western civilization. Has revealed.

This article is an attempt by the analytical method to study two meta-narrative "religious" and "political" and then challenge them in the framework of Derridas Deconstruction, so Derrida against a version of Christianity that it provided in the text mind founder, sole custodians of traditional institutions and the formal introduction of the screw, recounting concepts such as "gift", "sacrifice", "forgiveness," "messianism" and that Christianity has always belong to the classic discourse. Deconstruction also the narrative that the survival of "liberal democracy" and its political system based on the Soviet Union and the collapse of communism after the collapse, as the end of history, the last stage of human ideological evolution and the final form of government as a screw attempts to in presenting its weaknesses and limitations, giving new meaning to the concept of "friendship" based on the unbreakable brotherhood, unconditional and universal, promising practices new policy as a "community without community" and democracy as original " democracy to come "is.

The School of Political Science, just as the other modern schools in contemporary Iran, established as a necessity brought about by the modernity, and this necessity has always been signalized the necessity of applicability of political science. The early curricula of the School of Political Science and the works of the early Iranian modernists denote that the failure of the political science in becoming "applicable" is essentially related to the failure of the modernity's project in Iran. Explaining this failure pays our way to understanding that one. In this paper, through studying the suggestions of Muhammad Ali Foroughi, one of the outstanding master of the School, and at the same time one of the most important modernists in the era of constitutional revolution, we will attempt to show that early political modernists in Iran, in spite of their circumspections in revealing their intentions, conveyed their essentially liberal-democratic principle implicitly. If we take the relation between the theology of liberal democracy, modern political science and its "applicable" character into account seriously, then we can see the role of people such as Muhammad Ali Foroughi, beyond the compiling and teaching in the School of Political Science, as a strategic action to fight for liberal-democratic values.

The main purpose of this paper is to study the way(s) in which the America's hegemony confronted IR and declined during the 40 years of the Islamic Revolution. Accordingly, when analyzing the subject, Lacla and Mouffe's discourse analysis method is used. The hypothesis of the study may be mentioned as: while accepting the discoursive conflict of IR and USA, the United States intends to introduce IRI as an enemy falsely instead of  its being an inernational challenge and a regional rival to Saudi Arabia respectively and make it free From from its content (ideals and goals). As explained in the paper, the dialogue of Political Islam being established as hegemony has affected the discourses of power, particularly that of liberal democracy, regionally and internationally. especially liberal democracy. In this regard, the discourse of the United States failed to achieve its goals at various levels, and the decline of its hegemony is inevitable.

With the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Eastern Centenary, a new ideology should have emerged. Consequently, Francis Fukuyama, with the concept of history from Hegel, published an article titled "The End of History" in The National Interest in 1989, and the named end of the 20th century, the end of history by announcing that humanity has reached the end of history with the victory of liberal democracy over its ideological rivals. In this paper, after introducing the theory of the "End of History", the most important critically acclaimed explanatory-descriptive statements with emphasizing on library and the Internet resources has been examined and concluded that contrary to Fukuyama's view, liberal democracy is not the end of history. But if Suppose, for the time being, that liberal democracy is the best way of governance, this does not necessarily mean the end of history and the last man's way of governing it, and probably with the advancement of human societies, human beings in the future will have better forms of governance that are more consistent with human in nature and justice. Perhaps the reason for the projection of this hypocritical theory of the collapse of communism and Fukuyama's computational error is to ignore other ideologies, especially social democracy, as the powerful rival of liberal democracy and the kind of materialist view he has toward mankind. The crucial point that Fukuyama ignored is that "democracy can also be gained in a context other than liberalism."

Deconstruction is a strategy for demonstrating the contribution of philosophy to achieving the meaning of democracy in the postmodern world. It seeks to establish philosophical principles consistent with the principle of tolerating others and democracy in the post-democracy world. Meanwhile, Derrida's ideas in the field of socio-political democracy, such as future democracy and its oncoming challenges, are also rooted in his philosophy. Hence, democracy and deconstruction are the two sides of a coin, and one cannot be understood without the other. This connection is unbreakable and necessary and pivotal to Derrida's thinking about philosophy and politics. The breakthrough has come to suggest new horizons with the critique of modern systems including Western democracies that marginalized forces on the frontiers of democracy can actively participate in determining their own destinies. Contrary to positive methods, the underlying breach does not have a relative relation with the ultimate clarity of the Western society, and it is considered to be the fruits of the linear maturity of history. On the contrary, with the critique of metaphysical systems, it is a strategic breakthrough, so that the inertia of the universe becomes the instrument of successive negotiation. As far as the subject of this article is concerned, it attempts to define the Western metaphysical breakdown, then it shows how Derrida has benefited from this strategy in order to open up the political blockade of Western democratization with ongoing openings. The study of the link between deconstructive philosophy and democracy and how they interact with each other will be the cornerstone of this article.

Democracy requires political trust to survive and improve its functions. This article seeks to compare the capacity of the system of religious democracy and liberal democracy in generation of political trust through comparative study. For this purpose, firstly the importance and necessity of political trust are considered for the democratic system, and then two important instruments of the liberal democracy system are introduced in the production of political trust, namely "institutionalization" and "political participation". The failure of contemporary liberal democracies in gaining the political trust of citizens, which described in the writings of the researchers as "the great decline of political trust", is a starting point for explaining political trust in the system of religious democracy. In the system of religious democracy, in addition to institutionalization and political participation for building political trust, another important tool called "political virtue" is used, which will be the source of political trust. In this article, political virtue is introduced in the form of a tree that can produce political trust based on the relationship between Imam and the Ummah. Three important principles are introduced in the theory of political virtue that can create an accumulation of political trust in Islamic society.

Deconstruction is a strategy for demonstrating the contribution of philosophy to achieving the meaning of democracy in the postmodern world. It seeks to establish philosophical principles consistent with the principle of tolerating others and democracy in the post-democracy world. Meanwhile, Derrida's ideas in the field of socio-political democracy, such as future democracy and its oncoming challenges, are also rooted in his philosophy. Hence, democracy and deconstruction are the two sides of a coin, and one cannot be understood without the other. This connection is unbreakable and necessary and pivotal to Derrida's thinking about philosophy and politics. The breakthrough has come to suggest new horizons with the critique of modern systems including Western democracies that marginalized forces on the frontiers of democracy can actively participate in determining their own destinies. Contrary to positive methods, the underlying breach does not have a relative relation with the ultimate clarity of the Western society, and it is considered to be the fruits of the linear maturity of history. On the contrary, with the critique of metaphysical systems, it is a strategic breakthrough, so that the inertia of the universe becomes the instrument of successive negotiation. As far as the subject of this article is concerned, it attempts to define the Western metaphysical breakdown, then it shows how Derrida has benefited from this strategy in order to open up the political blockade of Western democratization with ongoing openings. The study of the link between deconstructive philosophy and democracy and how they interact with each other will be the cornerstone of this article.

The inability of liberal ideas of understanding and lack of attention to the characteristics of the political antagonism leading most theorists to explain the current situation as a Post-Political Era. Why populist extreme right parties (the area of the deep crisis of political identity) or al-Qaeda has been able to achieve success? Chantal Mouffe responding to such crises, mention the necessity of the era of "post-democratic" which should be fully inclusive and comprehensive talks. In fact, this understanding of politics, which is mainly due to the centrality of the Aristotelian problematic aspects of normative political philosophy, political and moral distinction between morality and politics and the common good does not exist. The paper will attempt conceptualized, analyze and evaluated central vision of modernity and liberal discourse, ontological distinction between the political and politics, the status of the subject and the role of citizens in radical democracy are discussed.

Studies aimed at to exploring relationship between religion and democracy have paid little attention to the concerns existing in the second side of this relationship. This article claims that a conceptual examination of democracy and a survey of its history show that existing suspicions are originated of a confrontation between Islam and democracy rather than their inherent conflict, and is related to the domination of liberal democracy that is defined as the liberal reading of democracy. Therefore, having made a historical and corceptal reflection on democracy, the anthor studies affnities existing between Islam and liberalism on the one hard and democracy, on the other hand, then he compares their differences as two rival political philosophies to prove his initial claim.