Good Society

Парадигмы изучения социальных движений ... Теория социальных движений - важное направление современной западной политической социологии, интенсивно развивающееся с 1950-х годов.1 По мере эволюции самих движений и трансформации социальных и политических институтов общества в целом, менялись и парадигмы исследования социальных движений - от изучения социопсихологических аспектов коллективного поведения до анализа движений в политическом и социокультурном контексте и как фактора институциональных изменений. ... В западной традиции принято выделять три основных парадигмы исследования социальных движений. Первая - парадигма коллективного поведения, преобладавшая в изучении движений до 1960-х годов. Социальные движения трактовались как иррациональное и нескоординированное коллективное поведение в ситуации социального кризиса и связанных с ним явлений депривации, фрустрации, агрессивности [Gurr 1970]. Представители структурного функционализма, в частности, Н. Смелзер, рассматривали коллект...

Quali sono i princìpi ideali e i nodi concettuali alla base della riflessione di Luigi Einaudi sul ruolo delle istituzioni nella costruzione e nel mantenimento della società liberale? Quale, a suo avviso, l’equilibrio fra competenza tecnica e visione politica nella progettazione delle istituzioni e nell’esercizio dell’attività deliberativa? In che modo egli ha declinato in concreto tali idee nella sua attività all’interno delle istituzioni nelle fasi cruciali della crisi dello stato liberale e della nascita della Repubblica? Sono queste le domande alla base dei contributi raccolti in questo volume, frutto di percorsi di ricerca originali compiuti in occasione del 150° dalla nascita dell'economista piemontese. L’approccio utilizzato è prevalentemente quello dell’analisi storica, nella convinzione che la piena comprensione della riflessione e dell’azione di Luigi Einaudi non possa prescindere dalla capacità di farne emergere “costanti” e “variabili” rispetto al contesto e alla sua evoluzione nel tempo.

CONSTITUTIONAL WELFARE RIGHTS explained, is that "our constitutional tradition" is indifferent to "economic inequality."' 1 0 "Here is Frank Michelman," he went on, pointing to a figure in the front row. "In 1969, he writes a piece [On Protecting the Poor Through the Fourteenth Amendment"] that simply doesn't live in this world anymore. Why? Did he just not understand our constitutional tradition then?"' 2 No, Lessig explained, if "none of us would write [such a piece today]," that was "a reflection of... how our background [context] has changed."' 3 Balkin and Lessig ignore that many liberal constitutional scholars have not quite ceased contending that the Constitution condemns poverty-not the current Supreme Court's Constitution, to be sure, but certainly "our Constitutional tradition" and surely the "ideal Constitution of best interpretations."' 4 Such theorists as Cass Sunstein, Lawrence Sager, and Akhil Amar seem still to hew to this view.' Nor does Frank Michelman appear to have abandoned it. Balkin recently published an important essay that plainly assumes that attacking poverty through the Fourteenth Amendment is neither off the table, nor off-the-wall, but instead is well within the terms of contemporary liberal constitutional discourse. 6 So, like Banquo's ghost, the idea of constitutional welfare rights will not die down, but it is not exactly alive, either. No fresh or even sustained arguments on its behalf have appeared for over a decade; only nods, and glancing acknowledgments. Some liberals, like Ronald Dworkin, now use the idea to affirm their steely distance from heedless activism and free-form interpretive methods; poverty has become the paradigmatic social wrong they would not dream of viewing as a constitutional wrong.' 7 Lessig seems to think that the idea of constitutional welfare rights "doesn't live in this world anymore" because of unspecified but deep changes in our political norms and our knowledge about the world.' s This sounds overblown, but certainly, the Court, Congress, and the nation have turned rightward; welfare has taken a thrashing, and older ideas about poverty and improving the poor have reasserted themselves. All this is relevant to explaining the scholars'

This book explores what a good society without poverty could look like and identifies policies and practices to support it. There is now widespread acceptance that neoliberalism has gone too far, while the welfare state established after the Second World War is in decline. Yet no alternative approaches have so far emerged. This book helps to fill that gap. It is based on a five-year programme of research supported by the Webb Memorial Trust. Research partners include leading organisations such as Compass, the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), the Centre for Local Economic Strategies, the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA), the Fabian Society, Bright Blue, Oxfam, the Smith Institute, Shelter and others, as well as a range of academics. We have also worked closely with the All Party Parliamentary Group on Poverty. Barry Knight led this work. In this book he brings together the findings of the various strands of the research and suggests ways to take it forward. This book has its origins in the work of a pioneering social reformer whose lifetime of research enabled much of the social advance of the 20th century but who is now largely forgotten: Beatrice Webb (1858-1943). Her Minority Report of the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws and Relief of Distress 1905-09 was about more than just breaking up the Poor Law. It raised new ideas, which she developed with her husband Sidney, such as organising the labour market to prevent unemployment, providing a national health service and operating Ix 2 Coates, D.

This paper seeks to relate a fundamental notion of political theory, “good
government”, to a hypothetical form of governance: the outcome of a competingprocess of an indefinite number of good governments. This is the “Chained Leviathan” which draws on the tradition of the pre-humanist Italian municipal movement. Divided into four parts, each examines a particular aspect of the possible political reading of Lorenzetti’s well-known cycle: “Municipal life in Siena”, with its institutional framework; “The allegory of good government”, reread in the light of
a pre-humanist republican interpretation that sees self-government as the common good itself; “The effects of good government”, showing how “Security”, guided by
“Justice”, triggered by the cardinal virtues and protected by the theological virtues, is the basis of freedom and civil prosperity; “The ‘Red Queen’ and the effects of bad government”, underlining how “Tyranny”, triggered by vices and “vainglory”, is the main enemy of the human species and leads to war and generalised misery

Abstract
This article analyzes the debates around the social and political with a focus on Ambedkar’s theory of action through conversion to Buddhism. It examines how even if agents were unanimous in the moral norms to which they subscribed, the motives of the conversion are more significant than the practical result of these actions. Once the individual members relate to one another with a new set of norms, political subjects newly acquire a moral obligation to adhere to the decisions they have made.
In the first section, there is the discussion of some of the complex issues of ‘discrimination’ and the local configurations of power. Ambedkar expanded the concept of social justice concerning the admissibility of groups as appropriate subjects of justice and their placement in a diverse society. In focusing on caste as an impediment to social justice, this section attempts to reconsider a historical relationship in which dependency and antagonism are associated and in which Dalit critiques of aspects of nationalism may also be, in some important senses, its affirmation.  Ambedkar speaks to the intricacies of Hindu society so that as individuals and groups are mobilized through the nationalist discourse, subaltern communities become disenfranchised from the promises of equality espoused within liberal forms of governmentality.
The second section explores Ambedkar’s critique of caste within the paradigm of modernity based on three principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity and his adherence to the principle of historical injustice. My presentation would refer to his insurgent and heterogeneous responses that may help us renegotiate how social is related to the political in newer ways.
Finally, the essay examines some challenges to Ambedkar’s theory of social justice and his idea of a good society. The first relates to the burdens of being an ethical agent and the transition to another possible self. The second is the place of utopian ideals that can no longer claim transhistorical validity but indicate a vision to inspire many (Omvedt 2016).  The third challenge concerns the role of violence in Ambedkar’s understanding of colonial injustice. In our reading, Ambedkar’s concept of social justice carries an unwavering commitment to difference within marginalized groups, yet it equally rejects radical cultural essentialisms which refuse to engage in ideals of exchange across a plurality of subject positions. The essay argues that Ambedkar’s original reading of nationalism heralded the Dalit’s exceptional status as the only group capable of addressing the social question in a postcolonial liberal polity.
Keywords: colonial injustice, discrimination, injustice,  nationalism, violence, modernity, caste, good society, social justice

аннотация. Статья систематизирует основные положения теории владения повесткой дня (issue ownership), согласно которой политики и партии, тесно связанные с актуальными проблемами повестки дня и воспринимаемые населением как способные наиболее эффективно их решить, по-TO WHOM DOES THE AGENDA BELONG? REVIEW OF ISSUE OWNERSHIP THEORY

La Biblioteca di scienze politiche e sociali, collana diretta da Carlo Gambescia e Jerónimo Molina,  si propone di  pubblicare opere  di studiosi  affermati e ricerche di  giovani  promesse,  traduzioni di studi stranieri,  nonché  lavori di autori ingiustamente dimenticati o poco studiati. Un progetto  impegnativo  ma  fortificato  da  una  precisa  scelta  intellettuale e metodologica: che la conoscenza delle regolarità politiche e sociali, per dirla con  il  Gaetano Mosca degli Elementi di scienza politica,  può  insegnare  a distinguere «ciò che può avvenire da ciò che non può e non potrà mai avvenire, evitando così che molti intenti generosi e molte buone volontà si disperdano improficuamente, e anche dannosamente, nel volere conseguire gradi di  perfezione sociale che sono  irraggiungibili».


Comitato Scientifico:

António Bento, Professore di Teoria politica
Universidade da Beira Interior
Giuliano Borghi, Professore di Filosofia della politica
Università di Teramo
Jean-Louis Clément,  Professore di Storia  contemporanea 
Institut d’Études Politiques de Strasbourg
Alexandre Franco de Sáa,  Professore di Filosofia politica
Universidade de Coimbra
Alexander V. Marey, Professore di Storia del pensiero giuridico e  politico occidentale 
Scuola Superiore di Economia  di  Mosca
Dalmacio Negro Pavón,  Professore di Scienza politica e Accademico
Universidad San Pablo CEU-Madrid  -  Real Academia de Ciencias Morales y Políticas
Luis R. Oro Tapia, Professore di Teoria politica
Universidad Central de Chile
Paul-Ludwig Weinacht, Professore Emerito di Scienza politica
Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg
I titoli della collana sono sottoposti a referaggio anonimo.

Direttori:
Carlo Gambescia  e  Jerónimo Molina

Coordinamento editoriale e grafico:  Carlo Pompei
Volumi pubblicati:

Carlo Gambescia, Liberalismo triste. Un percorso: da Burke a Berlin, 2012,  pp. 160, euro 14,00.
Dalmacio Negro, Il Dio Mortale. Il mito dello Stato tra crisi europea e crisi politica, nota introduttiva e prefazione di Aldo la Fata, 2014, pp. 110, euro 12,00.
Roberto Michels, Studi sulla democrazia e sull’autorità, introduzione di Carlo Gambescia e Jerónimo Molina,  2015, pp. 100, appendice iconografica  euro 12,00.
Carlo Gambescia, Passeggiare tra le rovine. Sociologia della decadenza, 2016, pp. 200, euro 14,00.
Gaetano Mosca, Il  Principe di Machiavelli quattro secoli dopo la  morte del suo autore, con un saggio introduttivo di Carlo Gambescia,  2017,  pp. 108, appendice iconografica,  euro. 12,00.
Vilfredo Pareto, Trasformazione della democrazia, con un saggio introduttivo di Carlo Gambescia, 2018, pp. 116, appendice iconografica, euro, 12,00.
Carlo Gambescia, Il Grattacielo e il formichiere. Sociologia del realismo politico, 2019, pp. 100, euro 12,00.
Franz Oppenheimer, Lo Stato. Storia ed evoluzione, uno sguardo sociologico, 2020, a cura di Carlo Gambescia,  pp. 168, appendice iconografica,  euro 14.00.
Julien Freund, L’avventura del politico. Conversazioni con Charles Blanchet,  edizione italiana a cura di Carlo Gambescia e Jerónimo Molina,  pp. 192 , appendice iconografica,  euro  14,00.

Edizioni il Foglio
Via Boccioni, 28 – 57025 Piombino (LI)
Email:  ilfoglio@infol.it
Sito: https://www.edizioniilfoglio.com/
Distribuzione: https://www.libroco.it/index.php

Актуальной теоретико-методологической тенденцией в отечественной и западной социологии является обращение к социально-этической проблематике. В связи с этим, по мнению авторов, значимость приобретает такой вариант социального воображаемого, как «хорошее общество». Модели «хорошего общества» конструируются с учетом ценностно-нормативных параметров повседневной жизни людей. Его содержательные характеристики в западной научной литературе прорабатываются преимущественно в рамках дискуссии либералов и коммунитаристов. Для разработки обобщенной модели, выходящей за эти пределы и адаптированной к актуальным российским социальным реалиям, необходим эмпирический анализ ценностно-нормативного содержания социально «хорошего». В данной статье авторами предпринята попытка выявления основных структурных элементов «хорошего общества», релевантных российским условиям. Эмпирическую базу исследования составляют результаты авторского социологического опроса «Нормативные основания “хорошего общества”», проведенного в апреле-июле 2016 г. на базе филиалов Всероссийского государственного университета юстиции (РПА Минюста России) в двенадцати российских городах. Выбор студентов юридических специальностей в качестве объекта исследования продиктован тем, что они представляют собой перспективную социальную группу, которая в ближайшем будущем будет использовать свои профессиональные компетенции, в том числе, для нормативного конструирования и воспроизводства такого общества, которое понимается, как минимум, как жизнеспособное. В ходе исследования выявлен значимый разрыв между должным и сущим в социальном воображаемом молодых людей, наиболее характерный для таких ценностей как доход и экология. Тем не менее, делается вывод о том, что российское общество сегодня содержит как элементы «хорошего общества», так и предпосылки к его дальнейшему улучшению.

Il tema delle nostra comunicazione riguarda un argomento molto eccentrico rispetto al fulcro dell'opera evoliana. A voler essere franchi, considerati gli illustri specialisti oggi presenti, soprattutto studiosi di filosofia, ci sentiamo quasi degli intrusi. E per due ragioni: In primis, per motivi disciplinari, dal momento che il nostro campo di ricerca è quello sociologico. In secundis, per competenze specifiche; infatti non siamo in senso proprio specialisti dell'opera evoliana, pur avendo letto e apprezzato un' ampia scelta dei suoi lavori. Ecco perché ci limiteremo ad alcune suggestioni, legate alla lettura del ritratto che Evola traccia di Pareto in Ricognizioni. Uomini e problemi 1 . Sei pagine dense. Che tra l'altro non sono sfuggite al maggiore studioso di italiano del grande sociologo, Giovanni Busino. Il quale cita la prospezione evoliana nella corposa bibliografia, premessa all'edizione critica del Trattato di Sociologia generale 2 . Sempre in Ricognizioni , dove Evola discute di Prospettive della cultura di Destra, è anche rinvenibile un accenno alla "sociologia come campo di lavoro", ma in senso molto critico: poche righe, sulle quali torneremo nelle conclusioni di queste brevi note 3 .

В статье проводится анализ роли социально-политической
активности граждан в  «хорошем обществе» (или обществе, пригодном для жизни). Предполагается, что она выступает драйвером перехода к идеалу более высокого порядка. Однако в этом случае имеется в  виду не  тотальная критика настоящего, а  выборочная критика отдельных социальных институтов и процессов.
Описываются основные теоретико-методологические подходы к изучению социально-политической активности. Выделено шесть наиболее часто используемых концепций: коллективного действия (Дж. Доллард, Л. Киллиан, Г. Лебон, Н. Миллер, Н. К. Михайлов-
ский, Ф. Олпорт, Н. Смелзер, Р. Тернер и  др.), относительной депривации (Т. Гарр, Дж. Дейвис, Р. Мертон, У. Рансимен и  др.), рационального выбора (М. Личбах, М. Олсон, К. Д. Опп, Д. Чонг и др.), мобилизации ресурсов (М.Н. Залд, Д. Макадам, Дж. Маккарти, С. Тарроу, Ч. Тилли и др.), политических возможностей (П. Айзингер, Д. Майер и др.), новых социальных (общественных) движений (С. Бюхлер, С.Д. Кендалл, Н. Пичардо, А. Скотт и др.) и по-
литического рефрейминга (Б. Гладарев, А. Демидов, К. Клеман, О. Мирясова).
Представленные модели расположены в порядке их возникновения, каждая из них продолжает разрабатываться
и являет собой попытку ответа на вызовы современности. Подчеркивается, что социально-политическая активность в  «хорошем обществе» коррелирует с личным материальным благополучием и способствует усвоению демократических правил поведения, причем подобные тенденции характерны как для западного, так и  для российского социума.

The central claim in this article is simple to the point of seeming naive: aesthetic activities make society better. They are essential for the so-called good society. Specifically it is argued that aesthetic reflection contributes to what Maeve Cooke calls ‘human flourishing’.

Vocabularies from the two dominant discourses in social analysis are surveyed:
(1) Applied Social Science, which is, generally speaking, empirically grounded and sits within a tradition of Positivism in relation to social analysis and
(2) Critical Theory, which is more theoretical, speculative and sits within a Marxian tradition of social theory.

First, I introduce the instrumental use of aesthetic practices and vocabularies that I want to oppose. This is done through a brief account of some ways in which creative practice can be used in forms of neo-liberal governance.

Second, I survey and compare the use of aesthetics in Applied Social Science and Critical Theory. As I discuss, despite their differences both employ an understanding of the good society based on human flourishing. I conclude by offering three ways in which aesthetic practices contribute to human flourishing: (1) through fostering individual flourishing; (2) as a form of political imagination; and (3) as a model of discourse not regulated by truth.

In this paper I wish to focus on the importance of an education
of our senses and body through sensorial elements for the improvement of our sensibility for situations and our faculty of judgement. This was the key focus of aesthetics in its classical form from antiquity until early 19th century when aesthetics was, to a large degree, a matter of aesthetic education and communication. Important were arts and letters, which still are important but now very much on the defensive also because aesthetics often is a about criticism rather than about the sensorial and bodily aspect of cultural products. I suggest
we can learn from the early generations within aesthetics not
least from Kant when we keep in mind that his investigation of the aesthetic judgement was for the sake of judgement as such, thus for our ability to chose the right conduct of behaviour. The aesthetic judgement is a judgement about our relation to a specific cultural context and our acquisition of it comes from being acquainted with cultural products. Aesthetics is thus closely related to hermeneutics, to how we interpret specific situations we find ourselves in.

ITALIAN ABSTRACT
In questa voce di dizionario mi concentrerò sulla storia del concetto di Buon governo con particolar riferimento alla sua reinterpretazione da parte di alcuni studiosi latamente appartenenti alla storia del liberalismo Italiano. In particolare analizzerò: 1) Il buon governo come problema e come ricerca; 2) Significati classici del buongoverno; 3) Reinterpretazioni del buon governo nella modernità; 4) Il problema del buon governo in Cattaneo, Mosca e Rossi; 5) Einaudi: buon governo, liberalismo, libertà.

ENGLISH ABSTRACT
In this dictionary entry I will focus on the history of the concept of Good Governanment focusing especially on its reinterpretation by some scholars (loosely) belonging the history of Italian liberalism. In particular I will analyze: 1) Good government as a problem and as a re-search; 2) Classic meanings of good government; 3) Reinterpretations of good government in modernity; 4) The issue of good government in Cattaneo, Mosca and Rossi; 5) Einaudi: good government, liberalism, freedom.