Banning the Former Ruling Party

Niesen, Peter

doi:10.1111/cons.12010

Cited by 14 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When the occupation ended, NS was dissolved and the public administration was purged of former members (Andenæs, 1979). Still, Norway refrained from introducing a permanent ban on successor parties or ideologically similar associations, opting instead for a libertarian constitutional approach in this regard (Niesen, 2013, p. 545). In fact, the postwar treason trials constituted something of a temporary anomaly in a country where the legal tradition has long been to punish unlawful acts , not group membership or even the joint formulation of illegal ideas (Dahl, 2006, p. 160).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

State repression of racist associations: Dilemmas of tolerance in the Nordic countries

Backlund

2022

Scand Pol Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When faced with organised racism, liberal democracies attempt to strike a balance between combating extremism and protecting core values such as freedom of association. Earlier research has argued that states that have experienced nondemocratic regime control in the twentieth century—either through a domestic takeover or a foreign occupation—are more likely to take a repressive approach to racist associations. In this study, I show that the previously overlooked Nordic region speaks against this explanation. Finland, which managed to avert a domestic authoritarian threat, is more repressive of racist associations than are the Scandinavian countries. The latter, two of which faced Nazi occupation, take a more liberal approach, which targets illegal actions rather than associations. These findings lead me to argue that the explanatory power of historical legacies cannot be reduced to a binary indicator such as nondemocratic regime control. I conclude by proposing a direction for future research on state repression of organised racism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

State repression of racist associations: Dilemmas of tolerance in the Nordic countries

Backlund

2022

Scand Pol Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Put crudely, but not inaccurately, as far as this very epistemic view of democracy is concerned: there really is no need to try National Socialism again. Hence only what Peter Niesen has called "negative republicanism" is legitimate; that is to say: rights restrictions can only be motivated by a politically "negative" past experience such as fascism, and might be most plausibly applied to former ruling parties in an undemocratic regime (Niesen 2012). By contrast, a general antiextremism is illegitimate, as it curtails the possibilities for citizens to engage with new ideas and forms of conduct.…”

Section: Basic Justifications Of Militant Democracy: Power and Pedagogymentioning

confidence: 99%

Protecting Popular Self-Government from the People? New Normative Perspectives on Militant Democracy

Müller

2016

Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article assesses recent normative theorizing on militant democracy—the idea that, to protect themselves, democracies might under some circumstances have to restrict the rights of those set on undermining or outright destroying democracy. Particular attention is paid to new justifications of militant democracy that seek to avoid the danger of militant democracy itself damaging democracy, as well as to the question of who the agent deciding on implementing militant democracy ought to be. Three new challenges for thinking about militant democracy are identified: certain forms of religious belief and practice, new varieties of authoritarianism that include elections and some limited freedoms, and the question of whether international and supranational institutions can play a role in protecting democracies.

show abstract

“…23 Under Hussein's rule, membership in the Ba'ath party had been a requirement for access to almost all of the public service and so this decision meant the de facto abolishment of most of Iraq's administrative infrastructure (Fox 2005, 208-9). As Peter Niesen (2013) argues, under certain circumstances it may indeed be legitimate to ban the former ruling party. In fact, given the history of the Baath party's rule in Iraq, in principle the decision to ban this party in order to facilitate a transition towards democracy seems morally justifiable.…”

Section: Iraqmentioning

confidence: 99%

Justice and Foreign Rule

Jacob

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This ground-breaking monograph series showcases cutting edge research on the transformation of governance in countries with weak state institutions. Combining theoretically-informed and empirically grounded scholarship, it challenges the conventional governance discourse which is biased towards modern developed nation-states. Instead, the series focuses on governance in Africa, Asia and Latin America including transnational and transregional dimensions.Located at the intersection of global governance and international relations, on the one hand, and comparative politics, area studies, international law, history, and development studies, on the other, this innovative series helps to challenge fundamental assumptions about governance in the social sciences.

show abstract

Banning the Former Ruling Party

Cited by 14 publications

References 9 publications

State repression of racist associations: Dilemmas of tolerance in the Nordic countries

State repression of racist associations: Dilemmas of tolerance in the Nordic countries

Protecting Popular Self-Government from the People? New Normative Perspectives on Militant Democracy

Justice and Foreign Rule

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About