The aim of the paper is to assess the feminist potential of political liberalism, as the latter was defined by Charles Larmore and John Rawls. The analysis focuses on liberal feminism to determine whether it would be more convincing if it became politico-liberal feminism. This problem is addressed with reference to two authors – Martha C. Nussbaum and Susan Moller Okin – the former being an advocate and the latter a critic of the liberal feminism and political liberalism merger. It is argued that Okin’s worries about this combination are justified. However, the conclusion is that Okin’s criticism emphasises the necessity and possibility of the revision of political liberalism – as a possible background of liberal feminism and a general orientation in political philosophy.
The author supports the claim that attempts to formulate a universal definition of the term “populism” are not worthwhile, because the sense of the term is usually determined by a specific social context. Understanding the utopian nature of populism provides a better understanding of the utopian nature of democracy and allows for a humble departure from dreams of a perfect social order, because, as has been shown in numerous survey studies, the contemporary shift of social mood, attitudes, and opinions toward some version of populism is a relatively simple consequence of the deficiencies of democracy in its neoliberal version.
Roger Scruton repudiates the idea that civil liberty is a natural and unconditionally desirable state of citizenry, while subjection is something degrading and unnatural. He characterizes the conservative political system as a ‘rule by institutions’ supported by a theory of nature and a theory describing the functioning of institutions. National politics results from operations of social and political institutions which have grown out of traditional arrangements, respect raison d’État, and are governed by offices. The author argues that this is a sound interpretation of essential political arrangements, if it can solve the problem of political reconstruction after a period of decline or disintegration. As a matter of fact Scruton offers such a solution in his analysis of various forms of liberalism, one of which he seems to identify with conservatism.
Energy is a basic industry for any economy and ensures the country’s security, including economic
security. The purpose of the article is to analyze the reform of the energy sector in Ukraine
for successful integration into the energy sector of the European Union. The state of the energy
industry from 2003 to 2018 is analyzed. The following main reasons for the decrease in electricity
generation in Ukraine are identified – a decrease in production volumes, the annexation of Crimea
and the anti-terrorist operation in the east of Ukraine, a decrease in the volume of energy output
from Thermal Power Plants due to aging capacities, difficulties with raw materials, low efficiency,
which, however, has a good effect on the environment due to a decrease carbon dioxide emissions.
The directions of reforming the electric power industry of Ukraine are considered in the context of
“industry-market-company”. Four electricity market models are analyzed and the new model of the
competitor’s market for electricity in Ukraine with contract market, spot market, the balancing market
is substantiated. The structure of the segments of the new electricity market and the participants
are proposed. More than half of the electricity market is provided by nuclear power, which ranks
the 5th in the world in terms of installed capacity. The analysis of the performance indicators of the
nuclear company for 2007–2019 showed significant reserves for the company’s growth, which are
being successfully implemented through strategic development projects and phased corporatization
of the company as a tool of unbundling. The main challenges of implementation a new market
model are analyzed and solutions are proposed.
Intellectual and spiritual formation of Joseph Ratzinger - Pope Benedict XVI - requires talk about the process of his development. The article refers to the most overlooked phase of the young Ratzinger, who moves from the position of a progres-sive and sometimes irresponsible theorizing academic theologian to the position of a thinker grounded in the community of faith, becoming the guardian and teacher of Christian doctrine in line with the spirit and tradition of the Church. A lot of light on the change in the attitude of the German professor sheds the preparatory phase to the Second Vatican Council and its debates, as well as the unpleasant experience of the student revolt in 1968, which finds our professor in Tübingen. And in this way the liberal German theologian grows into to an outstanding Catholic theologian of the universal Church.
Public education is educating influence of wide range media on political beliefs, worldviews and patterns of the everyday life of the audience, and of the potential electorate. The public intellectuals (the Henry A. Giroux concept), significant and respected experts (academics, journalists, politicians) play a special role. The article contains the presentation and analysis of the reaction of American public intellectuals to the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States – from the perspective of critical-emancipatory pedagogy. These are extremely critical to the consequences of D. Trump's choice: Ken Wilber's, Henry A. Giroux’s, Noam Chomsky’s, and several authors in the Berkeley Review of Education 2017/1 publications and speeches are recalled. The author concludes that Poland no longer has to imitate America, because in authoritarian drift (turn) it is ahead of it.
Recent years have witnessed the publication of a number of research papers and books seeking to assess threats of electoral victories of anti-establishment politicians and political parties, described as authoritarian populists. This essay focuses on three books directly addressing the origins and threats of authoritarian populism to democracy. It consists of six sections and the conclusion. The first section presents findings (Norris and Inglehart) based on surveys of values of voters of various age cohorts concluding that authoritarian populism is a temporary backlash provoked by the post-materialist perspective. The second section examines the contention, spelled out in Levitsky and Ziblatt, that increase in openness of American political system produced, unintentionally, a degradation of the American political system. The third section continues brief presentations focusing on to the causes and implications of “illiberal democracy,” and “undemocratic liberalism” (Mounk). The fourth section examines developments in the quality of democracy in the world showing that despite the decline in Democracy Indices, overall there was no slide towards non-democratic forms of government in 2006–2019. The next two sections deal with dimensions missing in reviewed books; the notion of nation-state, international environment, civic culture and, in particular, dangers of radical egalitarianism to democracy. The last section concludes with regrets that the authors ignored rich literature on fragility of democracy and failed to incorporate in their analyses deeper structural factors eroding democracy: by the same token, return to the pre-populist shock trajectory is unlikely to assure survival of liberal democracy.
en
pl
