In nineties the hypothesis was revisited assuming that extra SM families exist. Later, this idea was disfavored by the large value of the t‐quark mass. The flavor democracy hypothesis (or, in other words, democratic mass matrix approach) was introduced in seventies taking in mind three Standard Model (SM) families. Rather, I illustrate how, with reference to three distinct contemporary phenomena-ambiguities in the official global democracy and development agendas, new patterns of authoritarian resilience and development, and the emerging democratic and developmental crisis in the West-the relationship between the two is more complex, ambiguous, and contingent than it often appears. The argument advanced in the chapter is not that democracy and development are not, or cannot be, supportive of each other. Not only is this questionable intellectually, in that the belief that democracy and development exist in symbiosis rests on deeply political foundations, but the resultant practical attempts to promote them globally also embody a range of value-laden ideological characteristics. the fact that they reflect but one perspective among many, it is globally hegemonic, liberal understandings of both that have decisively shaped prevailing attitudes. Both concepts are often taken at face value and rarely problematised: they remain inadequately understood by policymakers, analysts, and academics.
However, this is an extremely problematic view. There is a general acceptance in both popular discourse and the more mainstream parts of political science and international studies that democracy and development are conducive to each other. Last part, these arguments are demonstrated through the Wukan Incident. Fragmented authoritarianism is suggested to make an efficient third realm for resisters possible. Besides, feasibility of rightful resistance’s operationalization isĭiscussed. The construction is realized through the discourse. It is claimed that this is a discursive third realm since In the fourth part, it isĮxplained how rightful resistance constructs a third realm. In the third part, Huang’s concept of ‘third realm’ is delineated. Some difficulties preventing the accurate grasp of the reality because of the historical baggage and ambivalentĭefinitions of the concepts. It is argued that such applications and conceptualizations have In terms of applicability and conceptualization. The first part in the second part, civil society and public sphere as first alternatives coming to mind are examined After the introduction of ‘rightful resistance’ in The main thesis is that rightful resistance It questions whether rightful resistance is a third realm or not. This article aims to bring a new angle to the literature by joining ‘rightful resistance’ of O’Brien and ‘third realm’
0 kommentar(er)
