The demarchy manifesto: for better public policy

What is wrong with democracy as we know it? Too many decisions are the result of political deals based on the power strategies and tactics of politicians, not on the merits of the case. The voters can only accept or reject the packages the parties offer them. The Demarchy Manifesto exploits the possibilities of modern communications to give a new role and focus to public discussion. It proposes taking the formulation of public policy out of the hands of political parties and putting it into the hands of those most strongly affected by particular issues. The aim is to tell the politicians what we want, after serious and focused open, discussion. Burnheim explains why this needs to be done, and how it can be achieved through voluntary means without constitutional change

The problem of constitutional legitimation: what the debate on electoral quotas tells us about the legitimacy of decision-making rules in constitutional choice

Proponents of electoral quotas have a ‘dependent interpretation’ of democracy, i.e. they have formed an opinion on which decision-making rules are fair on the basis of their prior approval of the outcomes these rules are likely to generate. The article argues that this position causes an irresolvable problem for constitutional processes that seek to legitimately enact institutional change. While constitutional revision governed by formal equality allows the introduction of electoral quotas, this avenue is normatively untenable for proponents of affirmative action if they are consistent with their claim that formal equality reproduces biases and power asymmetries at all levels of decision-making. Their critique raises a fundamental challenge to the constitutional revision rule itself as equally unfair. Without consensus on the decision-making process by which new post-constitutional rules can be legitimately enacted, procedural fairness becomes an issue impossible to resolve at the stage of constitutional choice. This problem of legitimation affects all instances of constitutional choice in which there are opposing views not only about the desired outcome of the process but also about the decision-making rules that govern constitutional choice

To Reason Why: From Religion to Philosophy and Beyond

To reason why explains the arguments and aspirations that guided a professional thinker's choices on the key issues that have affected both theory and practice for believers and unbelievers of many

An Essay on Gottlob Frege's Theory of Logic

(Docteur en Philosophie) -- Université catholique de Louvain, 195