Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAITCHISON CORNISH, Guy
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-28T13:13:41Z
dc.date.available2018-11-28T13:13:41Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationPolitical studies, 2017, Vol. 65, No. 2, pp. 339-355
dc.identifier.issn0032-3217
dc.identifier.issn1467-9248EN
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1814/59688
dc.descriptionFirst Published July 8, 2016
dc.description.abstractThe republican tradition in political theory offers a distinct approach to thinking about rights that addresses long-standing objections to the depoliticising logic of the discourse through its attention to power relations and the socially embedded nature of moral claims. However, the most systematic republican theories of rights-based citizenship translate these theoretical commitments into a tame set of institutional proposals that largely affirm existing states. In this article, I critique the limits of Philip Pettit's juridical republicanism and Richard Bellamy's parliamentary republicanism and set out an alternative populist account of republican citizenship based on the notion of rights as claims' - a form of speech act that empowers agents with self-respect to mobilise popular support and challenge arbitrary power when political institutions are unresponsive or unavailable. Populist citizenship takes place whenever social groups and classes mobilise directly outside constitutional structures in order to contest the legitimacy of the political regime and lay claim to new rights through direct appeal to the sovereign authority of the people themselves.
dc.relation.ispartofPolitical studies
dc.titleThree models of republican rights : juridical, parliamentary and populist
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0032321716648339
dc.identifier.volume65
dc.identifier.startpage339
dc.identifier.endpage355
dc.identifier.issue2


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record