Knappt hade jag skrivit om proportionella val som en maktbegränsande mekanism försummad i republikansk säkerhetsteori, så blev jag påmind om att Hannah Arendt argumenterar för motsatsen: De kontinentala flerpartisystemen innebar en större risk för ett totalitärt maktövertagande än de anglo-saxiska tvåpartisystemen.
- Cory Doctorow: “Ideas lying around”
- “This is our oil crisis, in other words: a moment in which a belligerent superpower’s ill-considered monkeying with the underpinnings of global production will cause chaos, the crisis in which “ideas can move from the periphery to the center” in an eyeblink. […]
Or rather, it’s our opportunity to seize – or lose. Governments are defaulting to retaliatory tariffs as the best response to Trump’s tariffs. This is political poison: making everything your country imports from the USA more expensive is a very weird way to punish America for its trade war. […]
There’s a much better alternative, one that strikes at the very roots of American oligarchy, whose extreme wealth and corrosive political influence comes from its holdings in rent-extracting monopolies, especially Big Tech monopolies.”
- “This is our oil crisis, in other words: a moment in which a belligerent superpower’s ill-considered monkeying with the underpinnings of global production will cause chaos, the crisis in which “ideas can move from the periphery to the center” in an eyeblink. […]
- All that is solid: “Cuddling the Russian Bear”
- “Why the break from this and the spurning of traditional allies? Why does Trump want to cuddle the Russian bear? The theatrics of the last month are overkill if it was all a crafty move to get European governments to cough up more on military spending. Ditto if it’s just for domestic consumption too. Some Trump voters will be amused, the majority bemused, and for nearly all of them they’re secondary considerations to the cost of living crisis – a key reason why they put him back in the White House. Nor are the intelligence reports that compromises Trump in all sorts of ways. As head of the most powerful military and intelligence capability the world has ever seen, in a sharply divided America front page splashes about Russian money and grim-sounding sex tapes would make little difference where Trump’s support is concerned.
The more compelling answer lies in divisions within the American establishment about the strategic orientation their state should have in the 21st century. The shifting economic centre of gravity towards East Asia coupled with the long-term demographic decline of Europe’s wealthy markets provides a compelling case for orienting away from the Atlantic to the Pacific.”
- “Why the break from this and the spurning of traditional allies? Why does Trump want to cuddle the Russian bear? The theatrics of the last month are overkill if it was all a crafty move to get European governments to cough up more on military spending. Ditto if it’s just for domestic consumption too. Some Trump voters will be amused, the majority bemused, and for nearly all of them they’re secondary considerations to the cost of living crisis – a key reason why they put him back in the White House. Nor are the intelligence reports that compromises Trump in all sorts of ways. As head of the most powerful military and intelligence capability the world has ever seen, in a sharply divided America front page splashes about Russian money and grim-sounding sex tapes would make little difference where Trump’s support is concerned.
- Jonathan Rauch: “One Word Describes Trump”
- “To understand the source of Trump’s hold on power, and its main weakness, one needs to understand what patrimonialism is not. It is not the same as classic authoritarianism. And it is not necessarily antidemocratic. Patrimonialism’s antithesis is not democracy; it is bureaucracy, or, more precisely, bureaucratic proceduralism. […] patrimonialism is suspicious of bureaucracies; after all, to exactly whom are they loyal? They might acquire powers of their own, and their rules and processes might prove obstructive. People with expertise, experience, and distinguished résumés are likewise suspect because they bring independent standing and authority. So patrimonialism stocks the government with nonentities and hacks, or, when possible, it bypasses bureaucratic procedures altogether.”
Categories
Proportionalitet som maktbegränsning
Härom dagen samtalade jag med en vän om vilka institutioner som gör republiker – kalla det liberal-demokratiska rättsstater den som vill – säkerhetsdugliga i dag. Det är en stor och spännande fråga. Så här bara en liten anteckning om en sådan institutionell utformning av många: proportionella valsystem.
Under året arrangerar Samhällsvetenskapliga fakulteten en serie seminarier om forskning, utbildning och det offentliga samtalet från olika perspektiv. Det första samtalet – om akademisk frihet, yttrandefrihet och universitetets roll i samhället – äger rum 23 april kl. 13:15 i Dragonen. Medverkar gör Johan Östling, professor i historia, LU; Sharon Rider, professor i filosofi, UU; Annika Lindberg, biträdande lektor i offentlig förvaltning, GU; samt Carl Dahlström, professor i statsvetenskap, tillika dekan – och jag agerar samtalsledare.
- Claudia Major, Carlo Masala, Christian Mölling, Jana Puglierin: “How to prevent the next war in Europe: A five-point plan“.
- Johannes Binder und Moritz Schularick: “Die Unterstützung der Ukraine ist eine Investition in die Sicherheit Europas“
- Andrew Postman: “My dad predicted Trump in 1985 – it’s not Orwell, he warned, it’s Brave New World”
- “What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture.”
- Paul Krugman: “Europe: Is the Force Awakening?”
- “Germany, the United Kingdom, France and Italy, each by itself, has greater economic resources than Russia does. Collectively, they have vastly greater weight than Russia. Moreover, the war has placed the Russian economy under severe strain. Yet, for most of Europe, the cost of aiding Ukraine has been barely noticeable. And if Merz’s remarks are any indication, Europe may soon be prepared to do considerably more.”
- Francis Fukuyama: “The ultimate betrayal“