Radical Philosophy of Law represents a cross section of contemporary critiques of the legal establishment—its theoretical foundations and its institutions and processes. Recognizing that proposals for alternatives to mainstream legal theory and practice do not belong to any single discipline, Caudill and Gold select essays by scholars in philosophy, sociology, criminology, and political theory, in addition to law professors and practitioners. Recognizing, as well, that no single perspective dominates radical legal theory, the essays exemplify the approaches associated with Marxian and (...) neo-Marxian analyses, American Critical Legal Studies and Critical Race Theory, radical feminism, semiotics, liberal theology, and psychoanalytic theory and criticism. (shrink)

It is often assumed that one cannot be forced to accept an offer as one can always reject it and be no worse off than one would have been had the offer not been made; offers involve benefits rather than the pains associated with threats. The confusion arises from the fact that we often also assume that in all cases where Q is forced to choose to do what P wants him to do, P coerces Q. I have argued that (...) coercion is only one “mode of non-voluntary compliance”. By distinguishing the different ways one can be forced to comply with another’s wishes, I have attempted to sketch out the various ways that non-voluntary compliance can operate with offers as well as threats. (shrink)

It is often assumed that one cannot be forced to accept an offer as one can always reject it and be no worse off than one would have been had the offer not been made; offers involve benefits rather than the pains associated with threats. The confusion arises from the fact that we often also assume that in all cases where Q is forced to choose to do what P wants him to do, P coerces Q. I have argued that (...) coercion is only one “mode of non-voluntary compliance”. By distinguishing the different ways one can be forced to comply with another’s wishes, I have attempted to sketch out the various ways that non-voluntary compliance can operate with offers as well as threats. (shrink)

This illuminating book examines today's most controversial and philosophically interesting issues in the major schools of contemporary political theory. In the past two decades, the study of political theory has undergone an unexpected renaissance and has once again taken center stage in philosophical debates in the West. Paradigms in Political Theory sets out some of the major controversies circulating in four schools of contemporary political theory: liberalism, Marxism, feminism, and postmodernism. Rather than attempting to cover the major elements of each (...) school of thought in a comprehensive manner, this volume reveals some of the more contentious issues facing each brand of political theory so that its cutting edge can be exposed. Chapters on liberalism criticize the foundations of the school from its assumptions and analytical methods to the problems of legitimacy and paternalism. Other chapters provide a basis for political obligation, analyze collective action, or critique the main proponents of liberalism in our time. The works on Marxism range from traditional critical interpretation of the work of classical authors to contemporary applications of analytical Marxism or undertake a synthesis between Marx and Nietzsche. The feminist essays present vigorous analyses of the self, the self in political action, and the self seeking personal and social truth in new ways. The section on post-modernism addresses the major issues in the political theories of Foucault, Habermas, Derrida, Lyotard, and Baudrillard. (shrink)

Though Karl Marx never developed a systematic theory of the state, he did have much to say about state action. In recent times philosophers have made attempts to capture essential elements of Marx’s political theory in order to reconstruct a general understanding of his ideas about state action that is consistent with his theory of history. It has been my purpose in this paper to layout and synthesize recent developments in this area with ideas developed in the late 1960’s and (...) early 1970’s in order to obtain a comprehensive understanding of what Marx meant. The debate of nearly two decades past, between instrumentalists and structuralists, is developed here in the context of more recent theories of “abdication” and “class balance” to generate four basic principles of state action consistent with Marx’s statements about the state. (shrink)

Though Karl Marx never developed a systematic theory of the state, he did have much to say about state action. In recent times philosophers have made attempts to capture essential elements of Marx’s political theory in order to reconstruct a general understanding of his ideas about state action that is consistent with his theory of history. It has been my purpose in this paper to layout and synthesize recent developments in this area with ideas developed in the late 1960’s and (...) early 1970’s in order to obtain a comprehensive understanding of what Marx meant. The debate of nearly two decades past, between instrumentalists and structuralists, is developed here in the context of more recent theories of “abdication” and “class balance” to generate four basic principles of state action consistent with Marx’s statements about the state. (shrink)