Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Perspectives on Politics
  4. Volume 13
Journal Home
Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Publication date:

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×
< Back to all issues

Volume 13 - December 2015

Contents

Page 6 of 21

Book Reviews: Modernization

Book Reviews: Political Theory

Critical Trialogue: The Carceral State

Review Symposia: The Political Consequences of Majority Rule

  • A discussion of Melissa Schwartzberg's Counting the Many: The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule

  • Frances E. Lee
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    18 June 2015, pp. 455-457

  • Majority rule is a hallmark of modern liberal democracy. It is also a complicated, and contentious, idea. It has been subjected to extensive criticism by a range of philosophers, political theorists, and constitutional scholars ever since Plato. And it has been subjected to a range of qualifications and constraints by political elites and constitutional engineers intent on instituting supermajoritarian requirements. Melissa Schwartzberg’s Counting the Many: The Origins and Limits of Supermajority Rule (Cambridge University Press, 2014) is a careful historical and analytic critique of supermajority rule. As Schwartzberg argues: “Although supermajority rules ostensibly aim to reduce the purported risks associated with majority decision making, they do so at the cost of introducing new liabilities associated with the biased judgments they generate and secure.” This is an important argument, of relevance to normative and empirical scholars of democracy and democratization. And so we have invited a range of scholars working on these topics to review the book. — Jeffrey C. Isaac

Book Reviews: Political Theory

Review Symposia: The Political Consequences of Majority Rule

Critical Dialogues

Book Reviews: Modernization

Review Symposia: The Political Consequences of Majority Rule

Book Reviews: Political Theory

Book Reviews: Modernization

Critical Dialogues

Book Reviews: Modernization

Book Reviews: Political Theory

Review Symposia: The Political Consequences of Majority Rule

Critical Dialogues

Book Reviews: Political Theory

Book Reviews: Modernization

Review Symposia: Insecurity and Xenophobia

  • A discussion of Paul M. Sniderman, Michael Bang Petersen, Rune Slothuus, and Rune Stubager's Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy: Islam, Western Europe, and the Danish Cartoon Crisis

  • Rebekah Tromble
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    18 June 2015, pp. 466-467

  • The 2005 Danish cartoon crisis has been the topic of much discussion among political science scholars. In September 2011 we ran a symposium on Jytte Klausen’s The Cartoons That Shook the World that centered on the tensions between multiculturalism, civility, and freedom of expression disclosed by the controversy. Paul M. Sniderman, Michael Bang Petersen, Rune Slothuus, and Rune Stubager’s Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy: Islam, Western Europe, and the Danish Cartoon Crisis (Princeton 2014) revisits the Danish crisis. Drawing on randomized experiments linked to broader survey research, the authors offer a nuanced account of Danish public opinion, and argue that the sensitivity of Danes to civil liberties concerns explains why the cartoon controversy did not result in an anti-Muslim backlash. The topic, the argument, and the methodology are important, and so we have invited a range of political science scholars to review the book. — Jeffrey C. Isaac

Page 6 of 21