Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The Persistence Of Power And The Struggle For Dialogic Standards In Postmodern Constitutional Jurisprudence: Michelman, Habermas, And Civic Republicanism, Stephen M. Feldman
The Persistence Of Power And The Struggle For Dialogic Standards In Postmodern Constitutional Jurisprudence: Michelman, Habermas, And Civic Republicanism, Stephen M. Feldman
Stephen M. Feldman
Since the 1950s, most constitutional scholars have presumed that the American political system is pluralistic, with autonomous individuals struggling in the legislative arena to maximize the satisfaction of their preexisting private interests. The "new republicans" reject these presumptions and insist that constitutional jurisprudence must recognize the potential for virtuous citizens to engage in a political dialogue that generates public values and identifies a common good. Frank I. Michelman has pioneered this revival by confronting one of the most troubling and persistent difficulties of civic republican thought: the likelihood that the political dialogue will be closed to segments of the community …
Republican Revival/Interpretive Turn, Stephen M. Feldman
Republican Revival/Interpretive Turn, Stephen M. Feldman
Stephen M. Feldman
The civic republican revival and the interpretive turn are two leading movements in constitutional jurisprudence. Civic republicanism emphasizes that citizens belong to a political community where they participate in a dialogue about the common good. Interpretivism, meanwhile, holds that all of our practices, including constitutional adjudication, are interpretive; we are always situated within interpretative communities and traditions that simultaneously constrain and enable understanding. Civic republicanism and interpretivism, however, both face serious challenges. Critics of the republican revival charge that it invites oppression and silencing of divergent voices because it emphasizes the community and the common good. Opponents of the interpretive …
Whose Common Good? Racism In The Political Community, Stephen M. Feldman
Whose Common Good? Racism In The Political Community, Stephen M. Feldman
Stephen M. Feldman
Political pluralists and civic republicans have launched constitutional and political theory into a controversy of paradigmatic proportions. Pluralists insist that politics is no more than a struggle between autonomous and rational individuals or groups who strive to satisfy their preexisting private interests. Civic republicans argue instead that the government should pursue the common good, not preexisting private interests. Something vital is missing from this debate: a recognition of and confrontation with American racism. In the context of American society, no constitutional or political theory can succeed without a comprehensive awareness and understanding of racism. The Constitution must be understood, interpreted, …