Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (803) (remove)
Language
- English (293)
- Portuguese (199)
- German (180)
- Spanish (62)
- Italian (24)
- French (11)
- Ukrainian (9)
- slo (7)
- Multiple languages (4)
- Catalan (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (803)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (803)
Keywords
- Adorno (51)
- Critical Theory (27)
- Reconhecimento (26)
- Recognition (24)
- Axel Honneth (23)
- global justice (23)
- Theodor W. Adorno (20)
- critical theory (20)
- Teoria Crítica (19)
- Frankfurt School (18)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (803) (remove)
Kryotechnologien bezeichnen Verfahren des Kühlens und Einfrierens. Wie verändert deren Einsatz in immer mehr Feldern unser Verständnis von Lebensprozessen und gesellschaftliche Grundannahmen? Mit welchen Erwartungen werden Menschen heute durch verschiedene Nutzungsformen dieser Technologien konfrontiert? Fragen wie diese versucht das Projekt "Cryosocieties" des Soziologen Prof. Thomas Lemke an der Goethe-Universität zu beantworten. Im Fokus stehen die sozialen, kulturellen und moralischen Dimensionen der Sammlung, Lagerung und Nutzung von menschlichem und nichtmenschlichem organischem Material durch kryotechnologische Verfahren. Seit April 2019 wird das Projekt als ERC Advanced Investigator Grant des Europäischen Forschungsrats gefördert. Die Förderung ist auf fünf Jahre angelegt. ...
L’arrêt Lüth – 50 ans après
(2019)
Même 50 ans plus tard, l’arrêt Lüth, rendu par la Cour constitutionnelle fédérale le 15 janvier 1958, n’a rien perdu de son actualité. Il confère durablement à la liberté d’expression un rang primordial pour le débat public démocratique et marque le point de départ du développement d’une dogmatique des droits fondamentaux spécifiquement allemande, à l’origine d’un renforcement des compétences et de la puissance particulières de la Cour constitutionnelle fédérale. Les raisons qui expliquent l’approche particulière de résolution de conflits entre droits suivie dans l’arrêt Lüth ne laissent pas présager un abandon de cette jurisprudence, abandon qui ne serait d’ailleurs ni souhaitable ni réaliste.
Representation is a process of making, accepting, or rejecting representative claims (Disch, 2015; Saward, 2014). This groundbreaking insight challenged the standard assumption that representative democracy can be reduced to elections and activities of elected representatives (Pitkin, 1967). It broadened the scope of representative democracy to encompass representation activities beyond those authorized by elections, transformed our thinking and provided a new perspective, putting claims and their reception into the center. This paradigm shift erased the distinction between elected and non-elected representatives and disclosed the potential of non-elected actors’ claims to represent (Andeweg, 2003; Kuyper, 2016; Rosanvallon & Goldhammer, 2008; Saward, 2006, 2009; Van Biezen & Saward, 2008). In spite of this lively debate, we identify an important gap in the literature: while this paradigmatic shift inspired many authors, conceptual frameworks that can be applied for systematic empirical analysis of real-life cases are missing. In this article, we fill this gap and propose frameworks for assessing and validating a variety of real-life claims. Our study provides empirical substance to the ongoing theoretical debates, helping to translate the mainly theoretical ‘claim approach’ into empirical research tools. It helps to transform the conventional wisdom about what representation can (not) be and shines a new light on the potential future of (claims on) representation.
The system of representative democracy is under considerable strain. Its institutions are struggling to maintain legitimacy, and its elected representatives are failing to keep their monopoly on (formal) political representation. An emerging multitude of (new) claim makers contests the authority of elected representatives as well as the functioning of the existing system of representative democracy by alleging misrepresentation. In this article, we identify a significant shortcoming in Saward’s claims-making approach; specifically, we argue that it offers little direction in addressing misrepresentation. We distinguish between claims of representation and claims of misrepresentation, and show how the latter can fulfill one, two or all three of the following functions: (1) they appeal to an enemy/antagonist (strategy), (2) identify causes of misrepresentation related to policies, politics, and polity (persuasion), and (3) claim to create a new linkage to "the people", sometimes present themselves as new representatives (reframing). To test this proposed framework, we compare claims of misrepresentation in Brazil made by civil society groups (before and during the presidential impeachment between 2014 and 2016) and in Germany (focusing on the parliamentarians of the Alternative for Germany during the first six months of mandate). Our results suggest that claims of misrepresentation are not intrinsically democratic or undemocratic, but are instead ambiguous, have different manifestations and disparate impacts on the representative system. Our article contributes to the conceptual development of the claims approach and to further understanding several critical and current challenges to representative democracy.
The established notion of political representation is challenged on multiple accounts—theoretically, conceptually, and empirically. The contributions to this thematic issue explore the constructivist turn as the means for rethinking political representation today around the world. The articles included here seek to reconsider representation by theoretically and empirically reassessing how representation is conceptualized, claimed and performed—in Western and non-Western contexts. In recognition that democratic representation in Western countries is in a process of fundamental transformation and that non-Western countries no longer aim at replicating established Western models, we look for representation around the world—specifically in: Belgium, Brazil, France, Germany, China, and India. This enables us to advance the study of representative democracy from a global perspective. We show the limits and gaps in the constructivist literature and the benefits of theory-driven empirical research. Finally, we provide conceptual tools and frameworks for the (comparative) study of claims of representation.
Relying on the theory of Saward (2010) and Disch (2015), we study political representation through the lens of representative claim-making. We identify a gap between the theoretical concept of claim-making and the empirical (quantitative) assessment of representative claims made in the real world’s representative contexts. Therefore, we develop a new approach to map and quantify representative claims in order to subsequently measure the reception and validation of the claims by the audience. To test our method, we analyse all the debates of the German parliament concerned with the introduction of the gender quota in German supervisory boards from 2013 to 2017 in a two-step process. At first, we assess which constituencies the MPs claim to represent and how they justify their stance. Drawing on multiple correspondence analysis, we identify different claim patterns. Second, making use of natural language processing techniques and logistic regression on social media data, we measure if and how the asserted claims in the parliamentary debates are received and validated by the respective audience. We come to the conclusion that the constituency as ultimate judge of legitimacy has not been comprehensively conceptualized yet.
Critique, and especially radical critique of reason, is under pressure from two opponents. Whereas the proponents of "post-critical" or "acritical" thinking denounce critique as an empty and self-righteous repetition of debunking, the decriers of "post-truth" accuse critique of having helped to bring about our current "post-truth" politics. Both advocate realism as a limit critique must respect, but Vogelmann defends the claim that we urgently need radical critiques of reason because they offer a more precise diagnosis of the untruths in politics the two opponents of critique are rightfully worried about. Radical critiques of reason are possible, he argues, if we turn our attention to the practices of criticizing, if we refrain from a sovereign epistemology, and if we pluralize reason without trivializing it. In order to demonstrate the diagnostic advantage of radical critiques of reason, he briefly analyzes the political and epistemic strategy at work in two exemplary untruths in politics.
Critique, and especially radical critique of reason, is under pressure from two opponents. Whereas the proponents of "post-critical" or "acritical" thinking denounce critique as an empty and self-righteous repetition of debunking, the decriers of "post-truth" accuse critique of having helped to bring about our current "post-truth" politics. Both advocate realism as a limit critique must respect, but I will defend the claim that we urgently need radical critiques of reason because they offer a more precise diagnosis of the untruths in politics the two opponents of critique are rightfully worried about. Radical critiques of reason are possible, I argue, if we turn our attention to the practices of criticizing, if we refrain from a sovereign epistemology, and if we pluralize reason without trivializing it. In order to demonstrate the diagnostic advantage of radical critiques of reason, I briefly analyze the political and epistemic strategy at work in two exemplary untruths in politics.
"Post-truth" is a failed concept, both epistemically and politically because its simplification of the relationship between truth and politics cripples our understanding and encourages authoritarianism. This makes the diagnosis of our "post-truth era" as dangerous to democratic politics as relativism with its premature disregard for truth. In order to take the step beyond relativ- ism and "post-truth", we must conceptualise the relationship between truth and politics differently by starting from a "non-sovereign" understanding of truth.
Wie erkennen wir Neues in der Politik, und wie bewerten wir dieses Neue, wenn es darauf abzielt, die vertrauten politischen Maßstäbe und -einheiten in Frage zu stellen? Die Piratenpartei als neueste Erscheinung in der bundesrepublikanischen Politik erlaubt es, diesem Problem nicht nur abstrakt nachzugehen. Meine Ausgangshypothese verortet das Neue weder im von der Piratenpartei eingebrachten Thema, noch in einer besonderen Position, die sie innerhalb des politischen Spektrums bezieht, sondern in ihrem Vorschlag, die Art und Weise zu verändern, wie politische Macht in der deutschen Demokratie ausgeübt wird: den Modus demokratischer Herrschaft von Repräsentation auf liquid democracy umzustellen. ...
Browsing the web for school: social inequality in adolescents’ school-related use of the internet
(2019)
This article examines whether social inequality exists in European adolescents’ school-related Internet use regarding consuming (browsing) and productive (uploading/sharing) activities. These school-related activities are contrasted with adolescents’ Internet activities for entertainment purposes. Data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2012 is used for the empirical analyses. Results of partial proportional odds models show that students with higher educated parents and more books at home tend to use the Internet more often for school-related tasks than their less privileged counterparts. This pattern is similar for school-related browsing and sharing Internet activities. In contrast to these findings on school-related Internet activities, a negative association between parental education and books at home is found with adolescents’ frequency of using the Internet for entertainment purposes. The implications of digital inequalities for educational inequalities are discussed.
This paper will examine the self-reported division of housework and childcare in Germany and Poland considering the job-related spatial mobility within dual-earner couples who are living in a household together with a partner, using 2007 data from the Job Mobility and Family Lives in Europe Project. We find that men who are spatially mobile for work often report shifting housework to their partners. Polish couples show a stronger tendency toward an egalitarian division of labor than German couples do, especially in terms of childcare. But the central finding of this research is, gender trumps national differences and spatial mobility constraints. Polish and German women, whether mobile for their work or not, report doing the majority of housework and childcare compared to their partners.
Der Fokus unserer Forschung zum Populismus sollte nicht auf dem harten Kern rechter Parteien liegen, sondern auf jenen, die diese Parteien nur aus Protest wählen oder gar nicht mehr wählen. Wir sollten auch nicht den Fehler machen, die Unterstützung rechter Parteien als irrational und postfaktisch darzustellen. Kern unserer Forschung sollten jene ungleichen wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Strukturen sein, die zum Aufstieg rechter Parteien führen.
I propose that the rising number of dualearner couples in the United States impacts the trend toward declining residential mobility and rising commute times. I describe these mobility trends in the United States, first relocation trends and then daily commuting trends. My research views the commute as the bridge in time and space between home and work that a) reflects couples' negotiation of preferences, relative job importance, barriers, and opportunities; b) has consequences for family functioning, c) reflects gender differences in the ways time and place are organized, and d) varies across the life course, by race, class, and region. I describe differences in family type and family functioning based on the commuting pattern and suggest a course of future comparative research that may improve awareness of how families and couples handle labor market demands, what structures shape the picture of couples mobility, and how nation-specific circumstances orient couples toward certain kinds of mobility and away from others.
Frauen in Führungspositionen
(2010)
Frauen sind mit Männern juristisch nicht nur gleichberechtigt, sie haben im Schnitt auch gleiche oder höhere Bildungsabschlüsse, Qualifikationen sowie Führungskompetenzen. In den Chefetagen sind sie im Vergleich mit den männlichen Kollegen jedoch stark unterrepräsentiert. Was hält sie vom Aufstieg ab?
Understanding the role of structure and social aspects regarding heat stress of people in urban areas requires an interdisciplinary scientific approach that connects methods from both natural sciences and social sciences. In this study, we combine three approaches to provide an interdisciplinary analysis of the structure and social components of heat stress in the city of Aachen, Germany. First, we assess the overall spatial structure of the urban heat island using spatially distributed measurements from mobile air temperature recordings on public transport units combined with spatially distributed geo-statistical data. The results indicate that the time of day matters: During the afternoon, areas with a relative low building density, like the industrial area northeast of the inner city, are the warmest, while surfaces in high-building-density areas like the inner city heat up faster during the evening. Second, we combine these measurements with place-based survey data collected in 2010 from residents aged 50 to 92 regarding their individual housing conditions, medical history and social integration to examine the match among heat-based stress of older residents, social conditions and elevated temperatures in their residential quarter. We identify disadvantaged areas for specific already-disadvantaged demographic groups in the city, pointing to a cumulation of inequalities, including heat stress among the most vulnerable. Third, we compare data of biometeorological measurements on urban public squares during the afternoon with results of the micrometeorological model ENVI-met to examine the spatial variability of the inner-city heat load. We complement the modelling results with on-site interviews to evaluate people’s heat perception at the same public places. A simulation shows that additional vegetation would increase thermal comfort at these public places, whereby the heat load assessed using the predicted mean vote (PMV) value would decrease by approximately 60 %. Furthermore, we demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses of heat stress simulation. ENVI-met allows for an overall reasonable representation of heat load during stable atmospheric conditions. However, due to the setup and structure of ENVI-met, large-scale atmospheric changes that occur during the day cannot readily be integrated into ENVI-met simulations.
Despite the popularity of direct democracy in recent decades, research on the actual output effects of popular decision-making is rare. This is especially true with regard to equality, where there are at least three major research gaps: 1) a lack of cross-national analyses; 2) insufficient investigation of the differential effects of different direct democratic instruments on equality; and 3) a failure to distinguish between different aspects of equality, i.e., socioeconomic, legal and political equality. This article takes a first step to tackle these shortcomings by looking at all national referenda in European democracies between 1990 and 2015, differentiating between mandatory, bottom-up and top-down referenda. We find that a large majority of successful direct democratic bills—regardless of which instrument is employed—are not related to equality issues. Of the remaining ones, there are generally more successful pro-equality bills than contra-equality ones, but the differences are rather marginal. Mandatory referenda tend to produce pro-equality outputs, but no clear patterns emerge for bottom-up and top-down referenda. Our results offer interesting, preliminary insights to the current debate on direct democracy, pointing to the conclusion that popular decision-making via any type of direct democratic instrument is neither curse nor blessing with regard to equality. Instead, it is necessary to look at other factors such as context conditions or possible indirect effects in order to get a clearer picture of the impacts of direct democracy on equality.
In the latest contribution to the Democracy Papers, Thomas Zittel explores when and how polarization becomes a cause for democratic anxiety. He argues that polarization over traditional policy issues is not in itself harmful, and can even be beneficial for democracies. However, he warns that polarization in which parties become divided over the acceptable rules of the game is a problem for democracies. Unfortunately, this latter type of division is increasingly common on both sides of the Atlantic today.