Department of Political Studies and International Relations
HIRL 211
Assignment One and Two: 40 points
Due date: Thursday, April 15, 2010 (in class or it is late)
Please answer all the following questions:
Section A
1. What is modern political theory and why do we use it in political analysis? Provide a thoughtful short essay that utilizes concrete examples to discuss your answer. (20)
Section B
2. Discuss what is meant by the concept of nation-state in modern political theory. Why is it so difficult to be exact about what a nation signifies? (10)
3. Discuss the concept of consent in modern political theory. Be careful to provide an explanation of the differences between “express consent” and “tacit consent”. (10)
Please Note:
All answers must be typed and checked for spelling and grammar. You are expected to be thoughtful about your answers so think through what you are saying and make compelling arguments. Use illustrative examples to support your points.
Do not just copy material from sources found on the internet. You will fail this assignment if you plagiarize from any source.
Your assignment is due in class on the date indicated above. Late assignments will be penalized by 5 points per day. An assignment that is three days late will not be accepted.
If you miss this assignment for medical reasons you will need a certified letter from a medical practitioner to lodge your excuse.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Lecture March 11: The Nation-State
The nation-state is a relatively modern idea. Its origins are said to be around the 16th century.
But how is the nation-state to be defined?
German sociologist Max Weber defined the state as "a human community with a defined territory" and monopoly over the use of legitimate force.
Two dimensions thus stand out: (1) Territory and (2) Legitimate force.
The two dimensions combine into what is called sovereignty. The state is the supreme authority over its territory. It can issue commands, and it must be obeyed (legitimate force).
Remember how Hobbes told us that the state (sovereign) is supreme? He meant that the state is supreme in absolute terms.
This aspect is open to debate, of course. Politics as we have said is fluid. There are no static positions.
Modern nation-states are both sovereign in a domestic sense, and in an international sense.
In the latter, the territorial borders (Locke) of a nation-state cannot be violated, for example. Therefore, the flow of goods and people into a given nation-state is always regulated.
The doctrine of popular sovereignty holds that the people (citizens) of a given nation-state legitimizes its authority.
We are still, however, left with having to discuss what is meant by a nation.
This is a tricky issue. The nation can be made up of multiple identifiers. These include language, ethnicity, race, culture, territory, history, politics, etc.
Still, the make-up of a nation is not a closed or defined thing, for a lack of a better term.
Nations are fluid concepts and best described as living organisms.
Some theorists like Benedict Anderson argue that the nation is an "imaginary community". It exists as a construct in our heads and is given meaning through media and other exchanges (like sport) that piece folk together.
Anderson says:
For our purposes, it is best to describe a nation as a political community who legitimizes the state.
The nation-state is thus a combination of two political concepts. The state rules based on the popular sovereignty given to it by the nation.
Nonetheless, we are left with a lot of questions. But that is the nature of political theory.
We discussed the issue of immigrants in South Africa, both legal and illegal. Where do they fit into the fabric of our nation?
Should we ban all foreigners? Should we allow anyone who wants to live here to do so?
I invite you to think about this question even as you decide what it means to be a South African.
You may find these links useful:
What is a nation-state?
What is a nation?
But how is the nation-state to be defined?
German sociologist Max Weber defined the state as "a human community with a defined territory" and monopoly over the use of legitimate force.
Two dimensions thus stand out: (1) Territory and (2) Legitimate force.
The two dimensions combine into what is called sovereignty. The state is the supreme authority over its territory. It can issue commands, and it must be obeyed (legitimate force).
Remember how Hobbes told us that the state (sovereign) is supreme? He meant that the state is supreme in absolute terms.
This aspect is open to debate, of course. Politics as we have said is fluid. There are no static positions.
Modern nation-states are both sovereign in a domestic sense, and in an international sense.
In the latter, the territorial borders (Locke) of a nation-state cannot be violated, for example. Therefore, the flow of goods and people into a given nation-state is always regulated.
The doctrine of popular sovereignty holds that the people (citizens) of a given nation-state legitimizes its authority.
We are still, however, left with having to discuss what is meant by a nation.
This is a tricky issue. The nation can be made up of multiple identifiers. These include language, ethnicity, race, culture, territory, history, politics, etc.
Still, the make-up of a nation is not a closed or defined thing, for a lack of a better term.
Nations are fluid concepts and best described as living organisms.
Some theorists like Benedict Anderson argue that the nation is an "imaginary community". It exists as a construct in our heads and is given meaning through media and other exchanges (like sport) that piece folk together.
Anderson says:
A nation "is imagined because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion."
For our purposes, it is best to describe a nation as a political community who legitimizes the state.
The nation-state is thus a combination of two political concepts. The state rules based on the popular sovereignty given to it by the nation.
Nonetheless, we are left with a lot of questions. But that is the nature of political theory.
We discussed the issue of immigrants in South Africa, both legal and illegal. Where do they fit into the fabric of our nation?
Should we ban all foreigners? Should we allow anyone who wants to live here to do so?
I invite you to think about this question even as you decide what it means to be a South African.
You may find these links useful:
What is a nation-state?
What is a nation?
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Authority and Consent
Much of what we discuss in this course speaks to authority (who rules) and consent (who is ruled).
Authority means that the state, for example, has authority over a citizen (individual). It also means that the individual consents to such authority.
Remember my example of who put the police in charge of the law (us)?
Consent theory is largely derived from contract theory. You will remember our analysis Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau (see previous posts below).
Consent theory says that when we consent to obey authority (the law) we take on the obligation to obey authority (the law).
Modern political theory particularly emphasizes Locke's thinking on consent. He tells us that there is a distinction between express consent (voting) or tacit consent (obeying the law).
Lock like Plato claim that living in a state (resident citizen for example) means that the individual consents to obey its laws.
This emphasis is, of course, contested. Remember that living in apartheid South Africa did not automatically imply consent by oppressed folk. This means that we must be careful to simply believe that obeying a law implies consent.
Some consent theorists also point out that voting is central to consent. Free elections processes authority. That process implies consent.
I want you to think about how and why you consent to live in South Africa and obey its laws.
What is the content of your consent?
What are the limits?
Authority means that the state, for example, has authority over a citizen (individual). It also means that the individual consents to such authority.
Remember my example of who put the police in charge of the law (us)?
Consent theory is largely derived from contract theory. You will remember our analysis Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau (see previous posts below).
Consent theory says that when we consent to obey authority (the law) we take on the obligation to obey authority (the law).
Modern political theory particularly emphasizes Locke's thinking on consent. He tells us that there is a distinction between express consent (voting) or tacit consent (obeying the law).
Lock like Plato claim that living in a state (resident citizen for example) means that the individual consents to obey its laws.
This emphasis is, of course, contested. Remember that living in apartheid South Africa did not automatically imply consent by oppressed folk. This means that we must be careful to simply believe that obeying a law implies consent.
Some consent theorists also point out that voting is central to consent. Free elections processes authority. That process implies consent.
I want you to think about how and why you consent to live in South Africa and obey its laws.
What is the content of your consent?
What are the limits?
Lecture 1: March 4
We began by asking the question: "What is political theory?"
Political theory speaks to the society we live in and the rights and obligations we live by.
It must be said that there are many facets, or dimensions, to political theory. We can conveniently break it up into three broad categories:
1. Interpersonal relations
describe how we divide up the benefits and obligations within society. Much of the focus is on cooperative activities. For example, how do we cooperate and for what reasons? Or, how do we defend ourselves and how do we punish those who break rules/laws, etc.
2. Interpersonal-nation relations describe how individuals accept the political authority of the state and for what reasons. It is inside of this arena that important issues relating to consent and obligations are raised. Questions that probe the nature of justice and the rule of law. What are the limits of the rule of law, for example? Who rules and how? Why choose democracy or any other political system, and for what reasons?
3. Global relations raise interaction among states. Questions about the content of global community is raised. Is there such a thing as international law, for example? Do states cooperate outside of power arrangements?
In our work this term we will focus on categories 1 and 2. Category 3 will be dealt with in a third year course confined to International Relations Theory (HPOL 311).
You should note that the categories above break up into a myriad of sub issues. For example, what is equality? How is wealth distributed in society? Who leads and who follows? How is the family/individual protected in the state?
Ok, but what about the real world?
We must be careful not to conflate theory with practice. There are normative expectations that reflect the expectations of theory (who should govern for example).
But in practice (praxis) who should govern is complicated by a host of issues. Some of those issues my speak to moral expectations like the recent furore over President Zuma's personal relations.
So, we should always separate theory from praxis (practice). Also, we should expect that political theory is always in flux (changing).
Political theory speaks to the society we live in and the rights and obligations we live by.
It must be said that there are many facets, or dimensions, to political theory. We can conveniently break it up into three broad categories:
1. Interpersonal relations
describe how we divide up the benefits and obligations within society. Much of the focus is on cooperative activities. For example, how do we cooperate and for what reasons? Or, how do we defend ourselves and how do we punish those who break rules/laws, etc.
2. Interpersonal-nation relations describe how individuals accept the political authority of the state and for what reasons. It is inside of this arena that important issues relating to consent and obligations are raised. Questions that probe the nature of justice and the rule of law. What are the limits of the rule of law, for example? Who rules and how? Why choose democracy or any other political system, and for what reasons?
3. Global relations raise interaction among states. Questions about the content of global community is raised. Is there such a thing as international law, for example? Do states cooperate outside of power arrangements?
In our work this term we will focus on categories 1 and 2. Category 3 will be dealt with in a third year course confined to International Relations Theory (HPOL 311).
You should note that the categories above break up into a myriad of sub issues. For example, what is equality? How is wealth distributed in society? Who leads and who follows? How is the family/individual protected in the state?
Ok, but what about the real world?
We must be careful not to conflate theory with practice. There are normative expectations that reflect the expectations of theory (who should govern for example).
But in practice (praxis) who should govern is complicated by a host of issues. Some of those issues my speak to moral expectations like the recent furore over President Zuma's personal relations.
So, we should always separate theory from praxis (practice). Also, we should expect that political theory is always in flux (changing).
Modern Political Thought Syllabus
We are playing catch-up and I have chosen to use this blog for purposes of our HPOL 211 Modern Political Thought
Below is out syllabus:
Department of Political Studies and International Relations
Course: HPOL 211 Modern Political Thought/Theory
Instructor: Dr. Ridwan Laher
Office: G06
Telephone: 018 389-2463
Email: Ridwan.Laher@nwu.ac.za
Course Description
This course is an introduction to the study of modern political theory. Students will be exposed to a comprehensive selection of contemporary issues in modern political theory. A significant section of the course is focused on the application of political theory to the African context in what is often referred to as the post-colonial moment.
Course Outcomes
Students will become familiar with the body of literature used in political theory
Students will be able to demonstrate an understanding of the purpose of theory and the various theoretical approaches
Students will be equipped to apply political theories to the critical analysis of contemporary issues in global and regional politics
Delivery Modes
• Contact through class lectures
• Selected presentations of case studies
• Peer learning through group activities
Assessment
• 2 take-home assignments 40%
• Mandatory attendance 10%
• Final Examination 50%
Course Outline
• Introduction to the study of Political Theory. What is political theory?
• Political authority and obligation. The Social Contract and consent.
• Situating the Nation-State. Legitimacy and Sovereignty.
• Democracy. Liberty and rights.
• Freedom, toleration and equality.
• Human rights.
• Race, Gender, Class, and multiculturalism
• The Postcolonial Critique
• Frantz Fanon: The Wretched of the Earth.
• Steve Biko: I Write What I Like.
• Conclusion: Political theory and the post-apartheid moment.
Required Core Texts
Fanon, Frantz. Wretched of the Earth. Grove Press: USA and Canada, 1963
Biko, Steve and A. Stubbs (editor). I Write What I Like University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 2001.
Related Reading
Desai, Gaurav and Supriya Nair. Postcolonialisms: An Anthology of Cultural Theory and Criticism. Rutgers University Press: New Jersey, 2005.
Satre, Jean Paul. Colonialism and Neocolonialism. Routledge: London and New York, 2001.
Please Note
You are expected to attend all classes. Students who miss more than a week (2 classes) will automatically lose 10% of their semester mark. Absences due to medical emergencies/illness or death of a relative require official documentation. Please arrive on time for all classes, turn off your cell phone, and take detailed notes during lectures. You are expected to keep current with all readings and assignment dates. The content of the 2 assignments and their due dates will be discussed in class.
Plagiarism will not be tolerated. Please do not take the chance of merely copying material from the Internet or elsewhere for your class assignments. Plagiarism will result in the allocation of zero points for the assignment(s) concerned.
Below is out syllabus:
Department of Political Studies and International Relations
Course: HPOL 211 Modern Political Thought/Theory
Instructor: Dr. Ridwan Laher
Office: G06
Telephone: 018 389-2463
Email: Ridwan.Laher@nwu.ac.za
Course Description
This course is an introduction to the study of modern political theory. Students will be exposed to a comprehensive selection of contemporary issues in modern political theory. A significant section of the course is focused on the application of political theory to the African context in what is often referred to as the post-colonial moment.
Course Outcomes
Students will become familiar with the body of literature used in political theory
Students will be able to demonstrate an understanding of the purpose of theory and the various theoretical approaches
Students will be equipped to apply political theories to the critical analysis of contemporary issues in global and regional politics
Delivery Modes
• Contact through class lectures
• Selected presentations of case studies
• Peer learning through group activities
Assessment
• 2 take-home assignments 40%
• Mandatory attendance 10%
• Final Examination 50%
Course Outline
• Introduction to the study of Political Theory. What is political theory?
• Political authority and obligation. The Social Contract and consent.
• Situating the Nation-State. Legitimacy and Sovereignty.
• Democracy. Liberty and rights.
• Freedom, toleration and equality.
• Human rights.
• Race, Gender, Class, and multiculturalism
• The Postcolonial Critique
• Frantz Fanon: The Wretched of the Earth.
• Steve Biko: I Write What I Like.
• Conclusion: Political theory and the post-apartheid moment.
Required Core Texts
Fanon, Frantz. Wretched of the Earth. Grove Press: USA and Canada, 1963
Biko, Steve and A. Stubbs (editor). I Write What I Like University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 2001.
Related Reading
Desai, Gaurav and Supriya Nair. Postcolonialisms: An Anthology of Cultural Theory and Criticism. Rutgers University Press: New Jersey, 2005.
Satre, Jean Paul. Colonialism and Neocolonialism. Routledge: London and New York, 2001.
Please Note
You are expected to attend all classes. Students who miss more than a week (2 classes) will automatically lose 10% of their semester mark. Absences due to medical emergencies/illness or death of a relative require official documentation. Please arrive on time for all classes, turn off your cell phone, and take detailed notes during lectures. You are expected to keep current with all readings and assignment dates. The content of the 2 assignments and their due dates will be discussed in class.
Plagiarism will not be tolerated. Please do not take the chance of merely copying material from the Internet or elsewhere for your class assignments. Plagiarism will result in the allocation of zero points for the assignment(s) concerned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Aristotle(Right).jpg)