Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-10T19:51:33.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Persistent Facts and Compelling Norms: Liberal Capitalism, Democratic Socialism, and the Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

David Abraham
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

No living social theorist has worked harder or produced more on behalf of progress(ive) universalism and grand theory than Jürgen Habermas. Over the past 30 years, Habermas has sought to employ (and, in so doing, has enriched) a range of philosophies to advance the cause of human enlightenment and emancipation: Kantianism, the moral-developmental psychology of Kohlberg, the sociological Marxism of Offe and others of his own students, the philosophical pragmatism of Pearce, revived liberal Protestantism, the linguistics of Searle and others, and, now, even American legal liberalism. All these and more have been among the approaches he has tried and continues to try. As one of the world's leading public intellectuals, he has done battle with those who reject the emancipatory quest: whether they be German historians and politicians rewriting the past in the name of the nation and its elites or soî-disant postmodern radicals for whom particularity and irony are the only guarantors against oppressive rationalist homogenization and erasure.“

Type
On Habermas's Faktizität und Geltung
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , 1994 , pp. 939 - 946
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by The Law and Society Association.

References

Abraham, David (1985) “Labor's Way: On the Successes and Limits of Socialist Politics in Interwar and Post–World War II Germany,” 28 International Labor & Working Class History 1.Google Scholar
Abraham, David (1988) “Individual Autonomy and Collective Empowerment in Labor Law,” 63 New York Univ. Law Rev. 1268.Google Scholar
Bartholomew, Amy (1993) “Democratic Citizenship, Social Rights and the ‘Reflexive Continuation’ of the Welfare State,” 42 Studies in Political Economy 141.Google Scholar
Blau, Joachim (1980) Sozialdemokratische Staatslehre in der Weimarer Republik: Hermann Heller, Ernst Fraenkel, und Otto Kirchheimer. Marburg: Verlag Arbeiterbewegung & Gesellschaftwissenschaft.Google Scholar
Bock, Michael (1988) Recht ohne Mass: Die Bedeutung der Verrechtlichung für Person und Gemeinschaft. Berlin: D. Reimer.Google Scholar
Bohman, James (1994) “Complexity, Pluralism and the Constitutional State: On Habermas's Faktizität und Geltung” 28 Law & Society Rev. 897.Google Scholar
Bronner, Stephen Eric (1993) Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Calhoun, Craig, ed. (1992) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Jean, & Arato, Andrew (1992) Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua, & Rogers, Joel (1983) On Democracy: Toward a Transformation of American Society. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Dewey, John (1927) The Public and Its Problems. Denver: A. Swallow.Google Scholar
Eder, Klaus (1988) “Critique of Habermas's Contribution to the Sociology of Law, 22 Law & Society Rev. 931.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (1985) Politics against Markets: The Social Democratic Road to Poxuer. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy (1992) “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy,” in Calhoun 1992:109–42.Google Scholar
Friendly, Henry J. (1982) “The Public-Private Penumbra—Fourteen Years Later,” 130 Univ. of Pennsylvania Law Rev. 1289.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, ed. (1988) Democracy and the Welfare State. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1987) Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, trans. Lawrence, F.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1989) The New Conservatism, ed. & trans. Nicholsen, S. W.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1991) “What Does Socialism Mean Today? The Revolution of Recuperation and the Need for New Thinking,” in R. Blackburn, After the Fall: The Failure of Communism and the Future of Socialism, pp. 25–46. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (1992) Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen (forthcoming) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans W. Rehg. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horkheimer, Max, & Adorno, Theodor W. (1944) The Dialectic of Enlightenment, trans. Cumming, J.. New York: Herder & Herder.Google Scholar
Kahn-Freund, Otto (1981) Labour Law and Politics in the Weimar Republic, ed. Lewis, R. & Clark, J., trans. Clark, J.. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kirchheimer, Otto, & Neumann, Franz (1987) Social Democracy and the Rule of Law, ed. Tribe, K.. Boston: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Klingeman, Hans-Dieter, & Luthardt, Wolfgang, eds. (1993) Wohlfahrtsstaat, Sozialstruktur und Verfassungsanalyse: Jürgen Fijalkowski zum 60 Geburtstag. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luthardt, Wolfgang (1986) Sozialdemokratische Verfassungstheorie in der Weimarer Republik. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macpherson, C. B. (1978) Property: Mainstream and Critical Positions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
O'Connor, James (1973) The Fiscal Crisis of the State. New York: St. Martin's Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offe, Claus (1984) Contradictions of the Welfare State, ed. Keane, J.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole (1988) “The Patriarchal Welfare State,” in Gutmann 1988: 231–60.Google Scholar
Perels, Joachim, ed. (1984) Recht, Demokratie und Kapitalismus: Aktualität und Probleme der Theorie Franz L. Neumanns. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgelsell-schaft.Google Scholar
Peukert, Detlev J. K. (1989) Max Webers Diagnose der Moderne. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Peukert, Detlev J. K. (1992) The Weimar Republic: The Crisis of Classical Modernity, trans. Deveson, R.. New York: Hill & Wang.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam (1985) Capitalism and Social Democracy. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Arthur (1939) Democracy and Socialism, trans. Rosen, George. New York: A. A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Simon, Jonathan (1994) “Between Power and Knowledge: Legal Studies and Social Theory at the Crossroads,” 28 Law & Society Rev. 947.Google Scholar
Skinner, Quentin (1982) “Habermas's Reformation,” New York Rev. of Books, 7 Oct., p. 35.Google Scholar
Teubner, Gunther (1983) “Substantive and Reflexive Elements in Modern Law,” 17 Law & Society Rev. 239.Google Scholar
Tushnet, Mark V. (1988) “Comment on Eder,” 22 Law & Society Rev. 945.Google Scholar
University of Pennsylvania Law Review (1982) Special Issue [on public/private distinction and its collapse], 130 U. of Pennsylvania Law Rev. 1289.Google Scholar
Voigt, Rudiger, ed. (1980) Verrechtlichung: Analysen zu Funktion und Wirkung von Parlamentarisierung, Burokratisierung, und Justizialisierung sozialier, politischer und ökonomischer Prozesse. Konigstein/Ts: Athenaum Verlag.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael (1988) “Socializing the Welfare State,” in Gutmann 1988: 13–26.Google Scholar
Wolin, Sheldon S. (1989) “Democracy and the Welfare State: The Political and Theoretical Connections between Staatsräson and Wohlfahrtstaaträson,” in Wolin, , The Presence of the Past: Essays on the State and the Constitution 151–79. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar