| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
181553
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using two recently published folios by Jeremy Bentham, I draw out a fundamental but little-analyzed connection between pauperism and both domestic and settler colonialism in opposition to imperialism in his thought. The core theoretical contribution of this article is to draw a distinction between a colonial, internal, and productive form of power that claims to improve people and land from within, which Bentham defends, and an imperial, external, and repressive form of power that dominates or rules over people from above and afar, that he rejects. Inherent in colonialism and the power unleashed by it are specific and profoundly negative implications in practice for the poor and disabled of Europe in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries subject to domestic colonialism and indigenous peoples subject to settler colonialism from first contact until today. I conclude Bentham is best understood as a pro-colonialist and anti-imperialist thinker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
177733
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Despite the global influence of his works during and after his lifetime, Jeremy Bentham is a largely neglected figure in IR. While his utilitarian mode of reasoning and his relentless efforts to change British society have received significant scholarly attention, the same cannot be said of his international writings and his vision of an international order of liberal nations. Bentham’s “global intellectual activism” in promoting legal reform abroad during the 1810 s and 1820 s suggests that the prospect of “exporting” constitutional and representative forms of government was key to this vision. In piecing together Bentham’s mature constitutional theory and his vision of an international order of liberal nations, this paper sheds some light on the historical emergence of a deep-seated assumption that informs much of current debates about the future of the liberal international order: the belief in the moral superiority of liberal democracies and their central role in upholding international order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
153781
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Distrust of public authorities is a mainstay of democratic politics. In recent decades, however, concern with surging civic suspicion has led political scientists to emphasize the value of trust for good government. This article advances a novel reading of Jeremy Bentham's political theory to shed light on the promise and perils of these two dispositions. Trust and distrust go together, in Bentham's account. In making this case, I reexamine Bentham's reflections on publicity, and distinguish between two perspectives implicit in his theory—the perspective of institutional design, and the perspective of popular oversight. This distinction brings clarity to Bentham's surprising recommendation: sober distrust toward public authorities generally, together with particularized trust in those (and only those) institutions or officials who prove themselves worthy of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|