Citizens between State and Empire

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12804/desafios27.2.2015.04

Article Sidebar

PDF (Español (España)) HTML (Español (España)) Lector Inteligente (Español (España)) ePub (Español (España))

Published: May 25, 2015
Issue: Vol. 27 No. 2 (2015): (July-December) Politics and the Inner World
Section Thematic Dossier


Keywords: state empire territoriality sovereignty citizen will memory internal world

Main Article Content

Authors

Björn Hammar
Universidad de Örebro

Abstract

The internal world is closely related to how the bonds between the citizens and public power are conceived. Aspects that in modern political thought often have been attributed to an external order associated with the sovereign state can nonetheless be located in the internal world of the citizen. Problems associated with the foundations of political order, such as fear, insecurity and divergence, do not only stem from external forces located outside of the citizen, but also from her internal world, which means that political contingency comprises that world. Thomas Hobbes returns once and again to the need to control or minimize the contingency of the internal world within the sovereign state. This paper seeks to widen the perspective dominated by sovereign statehood in modern political thought, by inquiring how the internal world is conceived in relation to the tension between state (or republic) and empire as the foundation of political order. The historical and theoretical co-existence of states and empires has not necessarily been contentious or of mutual exclusion, as modern republicanism frequently claims. If the link between republic and empire is an intrinsic part of political order, questions remain to be addressed about how this link is related to the inner world of the citizen. How the citizen and herself is defined in relation to modern states and empires both feed upon and have consequences for conceptions about territoriality, government and sovereignty.
How to Cite
Hammar, B. (2015). Citizens between State and Empire. Desafíos, 27(2), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.12804/desafios27.2.2015.04
References

Andrew, E. G. (2011). Imperial republics. Revolution, war, and territorial expansion from the English Civil War to the French Revolution. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Armitage, D. (2013). Foundations of modern international thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Balot, R. (2010). Polybius advice to the imperial republic. Political Theory,38(4), 483-509.

Bartelson, J. (2009). Visions of world community. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Benton, L. (2010). A search for sovereignty. Law and geography in European empires, 1400-1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Boucher, D. (2009). The limits of ethics in international relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Burbank, J., & Cooper, F. (2010). Empires in world history. Power and the politics of difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Cavallar, G. (2002). The rights of strangers: theories of international hospitality, the global community, and political justice since Vitoria. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Comparato, V. I. (1996). A case of modern individualism: politics and the uneasiness of intelectuals in the Baroque Age. En J. Coleman (Ed.), The individual in political theory and practice (pp. 149-170). Oxford: Clarendon.

Doyle, M. W. (1986). Empires. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Dryzek, J. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Elden, S. (2013). The birth of territory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Erskine, A. (1990). The Hellenistic Stoa: political thought and action. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Fishkin, J. S., & Laslett, P. (Comps.). (2003). Debating deliberative democracy. Oxford: Blackwell.

Hammar, B. (2001). Interiores y exteriores politológicos. Foro Interno: Anuario de Teoría Política, (1), 75-113.

Hammar, B. (2008). Metonimias del Estado soberano. Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana. Revista Internacional de Filosofía Iberoamericana y Teoría Social, 13(43), 33-48.

Hankins, J. (2010). Exclusivist republicanism and the non-monarchical republic. Political Theory, 38(4), 452-482.

Hobbes, T. (1996). Leviathan, or the matter, form, & power of a commonwealth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hörnqvist, M. (2004). Machiavelli and empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Laxton, P. (Comp.). (2001). The new nature of maps. Essays in the history of cartography. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Loraux, N. (2009). La ciudad dividida. El olvido en la memoria de Atenas. Buenos Aires: Katz.

Meiggs, R. (1972). Athenian Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Muldoon, J. (1999). Empire and order. The concept of empire 800-1800. Londres: MacMillan.

Nederman, C. J. (2009). Lineages of European political thought. Explorations along the medieval/modern divide from John of Salisbury to Hegel. Washington: The Catholic University of America Press.

Nelson, E. (2010). The Hebrew republic. Jewish sources and the transformation of European political thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Olsson, G. (2007). Abysmal. A critique of cartographic reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Pagden, A. (1998). Lords of all the world. Ideologies of empire in Spain, Britain and France c. 1500-c. 1800. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Pagden, A. (2003). Human rights, natural rights, and Europe’s imperial legacy. Political Theory, 31(2), 171-199.

Pocock, J. G. (1975). The Machiavellian moment. Florentine political thought and the Atlantic tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Roiz, J. (2003). La recuperación del buen juicio. Teoría política en el siglo veinte. Madrid: Foro Interno.

Roiz, J. (2008). Sociedad vigilante y mundo judío en la concepción del Estado. Madrid: Editorial Complutense.

Roiz, J. (2013). El mundo interno y la política. Madrid: Plaza y Valdés.

Rosanvallon, P. (1999). La consagración del ciudadano. México D.F.: Instituto Mora.

Rosanvallon, P. (2004). El pueblo inalcanzable. Historia de la representación política en Francia. México D.F.: Instituto Mora.

Schoefield, M. (1991). The stoic idea of the city. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Serrano Marín, V. (2010). Soñando monstruos. Terror y delirio en la modernidad. Madrid: Plaza y Valdés.

Springborg, P. (1992). Western republicanism and the Oriental Prince. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Tabachnik, D. E., & Koivukoski, T. (Eds.). (2009). Enduring empire, ancient lessons for global politics. University of Toronto Press.

Yates, F. A. (1975). Astraea. The imperial theme in the sixteenth century. Londres: Routledge.

Query Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Publcation metrics

1297 1082




 

Los derechos de autor serán de la Universidad del Rosario. Cuando el autor quiera publicar el manuscrito en otra publicación, deberá pedir a la Editorial de la Universidad del Rosario los permisos correspondientes. De igual forma, cuando la Revista esté interesada en publicar artículos que ya han sido publicados en otras revistas, procederá a solicitar los permisos correspondientes en la editorial donde se realizó la primera publicación. Bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License, los autores pueden compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.