Democracy is inclusive : arendt’s paradigm.

Abstract

This paper focuses on the connection between an inclusive idea of citizenship and the real concept of democracy. A good definition of democracy stresses the basic principle of autonomy, and an adequate notion of autonomy implies the double face of it: the public and the personal one. Hannah Arendt’s reflection on statelessness plays a paradigmatic role in this political and philosophical perspective on citizenship. Through Arendt’s analysis, the article tries to show the essential nature of the relationship between democracy and inclusive citizenship

Keywords:

Autonomy Citizenship Arendt Democracy Statelessness

References

Agier, M. (2008). On the Margins of the World. The Refugee Experience Today. Malden/MA: Politiy Press.

Agier, M. (2011). Managing the Undesirables. Refugee Camps and Humanitarians Government. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Andrews, G. (Ed.) (1991). Citizenship. London: Lawrence and Wishart.

Arendt, H. (1972). On Violence. In Crisis of the Republic (pp. 103-198). San Diego-New York-London: Harcourt Brace & Co.

Arendt, H. (1979). The Origin of Totalitarianism (new edition with added Prefaces). San Diego-New York-London: Harcourt Brace & Co.

Arendt, H. (1998).The Human Condition (Introduction by M. Canovan (Ed.)). Chicago-London: Chicago University Press.

Arendt, H. (2003). Was ist Politik?: Fragmente aus dem Nachlaß. München: Piper Taschenbuch

Balibar, É. (2010). Arendt, le droit aux droits et la désobéissance civique. In La proposition de l’égaliberté (pp. 201-227). Paris: Puf.

Barbelet, J. M. (1989). Citizenship. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Benhabib, S. (Ed.) (1996). Democracy and Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Birmingham, P. (2006). Hannah Arendt and Human Rights. The Predicament of Common Responsibility. New York: Indiana University Press.

Brożek, B. (2013). Philosophy and Neuroscience. Three Modes of Interaction. In J. Stelmach, B. Brożek & Ł. Kurek (Eds.). Philosophy in Neuroscience. Krakow: Copernicus Center Press.

Carens, J. H. (2013). The Ethics of Immigration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Castelfranchi, C. (2014). NeuroNorme: per un approccio non riduzionista. Cosa cercare e non cercare nel cervello. Rivista di filosofia del diritto, III, n.s.

Castoriadis, C. (1975). L’institution imaginaire de la société. Paris: Le Seuil.

Cohen, J. & Sabel, C. (1997, May). Directly-Deliberative Polyarchy. European Law Journal, 3(4), pp. 313-342.

Cole, P. & Wellman, C. H. (2011). Debating the Ethics of Immigration. Is There a Right to Exclude? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dworkin, R. (1993). Life’s Dominion. An Argument about Abortion, Euthanasia and Individual Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Goldoni, M. & Maccorkindale, C. (2012) (Eds.). Hannah Arendt and the Law. Oxford-Portland/NY: Hart.

Greblo, E. (2017). Luoghi a perdere. Hannah Arendt e la questione dei rifugiati. Scienza & Politica, 29(57), pp. 195-212.

Dewey, J. (1954). The Public and its Problems. Chicago: Swallow Press.

Habermas, J. (1992). Between Facts and Norms. Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge/MA: The MIT Press.

Habermas, J. (1996). Three Normative Models of Democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and Difference (pp. 21-30). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Hayden, P. (2009). Political Evil in a Global Age. Hannah Arendt and International Theory. London: Routledge.

Held, D. (1989). Political Theory and the Modern State. Essays on State, Power, and Democracy. London: Polity Press.

Hume, D. (1748). An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. II. 3. I. London: A. Millar.

Iacoboni, M. (2008). I neuroni a specchio. Come capiamo ciò che fanno gli altri. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.

Kant, I. (1785). Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. In AA. BD., Kants gesammelte Schriften. IV. 1904, II. (pp. 385-463). Berlin: Hrsg. Von der Koniglich Preusen, Kant, I. (1793). Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis. In AA. BD. Kants gesammelte Schriften VIII, 1912, II. (pp. 273-314). Berlin: De Gruyter.

Kant, I. (1797). Die Metaphysik der Sitten: Der Streit der Fakultäten. London: Forgotten Books (2018).

Kelsen, H. (1929). The Essence and Value of Democracy. N. Urbinati and C. Invernizzi Accetti (Eds.) (2013). Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Klabbers, J. (2007, March). Possible Islands of Predictability. The Legal Thought of Hannah Arendt. Leiden Journal of International Law, 20(1), pp. 1-23.

Lalatta Costerbosa, M. (2014). Democrazia assediata. Rome: DeriveApprodi.

Lalatta Costerbosa, M. (Ed.) (2016). Lo spazio della responsabilità. Approdi e limiti delle neuroscienze. Bologna: il Mulino.

La Torre, M. (2004). Cittadinanza e ordine politico. Diritti, cirsi della sovranità e sfera pubblica in una prospettiva europea. Torino: Giappichelli.

La Torre, M. (2013). Hannah Arendt and the Concept of Law. Against the Tradition. Archiv für Rechts-und Sozialphilosophie, 99(3), pp. 400-416.

Lukes, S. (1982). Relativism in Its Place. In S. Lukes & M. Hollis (Eds.), Rationality and Relativism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Macready, J. D. (2017). Hannah Arendt and the Fragility of Human Dignity. Lanham/MD: Lexington Books.

McCabe, D. P. & Castel, A. D. (2008, April). Seeing Is Believing. The Effect of Brain Images on Judgements of Scientific Reasoning. Cognition. 107(1), pp. 343-352.

McCabe, D. P. & Castel, A. D. & Rhodes, M. G. (2011). The Influence of FMRI Lie Detection Evidence on Juror Decision Making. Behavioural Sciences and Law, pp. 566-577.

Mill, J. S. (2008). On Liberty and Other Essays. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press.

Nedelsky, J. (2001). Judgment, Diversity, and Relational Autonomy. In R. Beiner & J. Nedelsky (Eds.), Judgment, Imagination, and Politics. Themes from Kant and Arendt (pp. 103-120). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

Rizzato, M. & Donelli, D. (2011). Io sono il tuo specchio. Neuroni specchio ed empatia. Torino: Edizioni Amrita.