Marianne Talbot: another excellent series of lectures… well worth watching!
This is worth a read before you vote:
Worth another look given the current weaponisation of antisemitism:
I agree wholeheartedly with Finkelstein’s rational thinking in this matter. And he certainly has the scholarship to back it all up.
Following last week’s by-election results and the growing doubts over the legality and validity of the result in the Cumbrian seat of Copeland, in today’s volatile political climate it …
Agree with this. We cannot create a new elite. And also we would lose out from learning the concerns of those who self exclude.
One of the issues dividing commentators on this blog is whether participation in sortition-based assemblies should be mandatory or voluntary — see, for example. Those of us advocating legislative juries based on Athenian nomothetic panels advocate quasi-mandatory participation in order to ensure accurate descriptive representativity. Those, however, who argue for full in-depth participatory deliberation claim that mandatory participation would be ‘disastrous’, as it is hard to see how a a ‘full-charge’ legislature — essentially like existing elected legislatures but with members selected by lot — could function with (in effect) conscripted members.
A paper by Vincent Jacquet in the European Journal of Political Research, examines why it is that the overwhelming majority of randomly-selected persons refuse the invitation to participate in deliberative minipublics. Given that the descriptive representativity of the minipublic (vis-a-vis the target population) is one of the principal rationales for sortition, acceptance rates are extremely poor, ranging from 1% (America…
View original post 557 more words
We still have obligations. Perhaps our generation even more so than usual, given the mess we made over the last 30 years – the first generation to leave the next worse off in centuries!
Dec. 9, 2016
by Michael Friedman, L.M.S.W.
Adjunct Associate Professor, Columbia University School of Social Work
Recently I took a philosophy mini-course called “Conscientious Citizenship,” which explored our moral obligations largely through the heroic image of Socrates, who accepted a death sentence as a matter of principle and loyalty to his nation.
Although several of us questioned Socrates’ presumed heroism, the course got me thinking about what the obligations of citizenship are; and, because I am an older, retired person (73 as I write this), it got me wondering what the obligations of older, retired people are and whether they are different from the obligations of younger people.
A strange question perhaps. It is commonplace to think about what society ought to do for old people. But this is the converse question, Kennedyesque in a way. Not what does a society owe to old people, but what do old people owe…
View original post 1,634 more words