On the Sovereign Authorization

Orwin, Clifford

doi:10.1177/009059177500300103

Cited by 55 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Skinner, 2005, p. 171). Hence, the sovereign representative is deemed to have the “exclusive right to judge the means appropriate to its ends” and is indemnified from punishment by its subjects (Orwin, 1975, p. 34). Where the sovereign representative is not an absolute monarch but a parliamentary assembly, its will is that of the majority of its members (Fleming, 2021, p. 21).…”

Section: The Ideational Origins Of the Logic Of Decisivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For Hobbes, as for the logic of decisiveness, politics is primarily about maintaining social order and government legitimacy through fear narratives and not about changing conceptions of the common good (Orwin, 1975, p. 35). Thus, representatives invoking the logic of decisiveness appeal to a long tradition of fear politics and pessimism about human nature in the absence of decisive government.…”

Section: The Ideational Origins Of the Logic Of Decisivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Decisiveness as a logic of political action

Rogenhofer

2022

Constellations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Ideational Origins Of the Logic Of Decisivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Ideational Origins Of the Logic Of Decisivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decisiveness as a logic of political action

Rogenhofer

2022

Constellations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Authorization, the process of endowing covenant with the status of political right, is therefore essential for Hobbes. Hobbesian authorization involves the transformation of a discourse of political right away from a heavenly to an earthly foundation (Orwin, 1975: 39). A detailed inspection of the Hobbesian account of authorization results in a more nuanced understanding of the basis of sovereign authority.…”

Section: Leviathan As a Security Regimementioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens into wolves? Carl Schmitt’s fictive account of security

Moore¹

2011

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article assesses the extent to which security regimes are the products of authorization in the thought of Thomas Hobbes and Carl Schmitt. The Hobbesian security regime offers a contingent construction of security in terms of processes of authorization and brings into view questions about the epistemic construction of security within security discourse today. The Schmittian concept of security involves the naturalization of security through the state, meaning that security is understood as condition rather than regime. Rather than look to Carl Schmitt’s concept of security as the paradigm of international security today, there are clear benefits in returning to the contractual account of security evident in the Hobbesian emphasis on authorization. Security is not the primary value of political community, but the means by which political communities realize their internal goods. Schmitt’s security regime is fictive, driven by colourful metaphor and political theology. By returning to classic questions of authorization—how a security regime authorizes itself—International Relations theory can examine the legitimation of security beyond an exclusively state-centric model.

show abstract

“…See Hobbes 1981, chaps. 21, 42-43; the sovereign can commit an iniquity-but not an injustice-against a citizen; and "profession of the tongue is but an external thing" (see Orwin 1975).…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Politics and the Problem of Technology: An Essay on Heidegger and the Tradition of Political Philosophy

Weinberger

1992

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I examine Heidegger's postmodern interpretation of technology, with an eye to exposing its weaknesses. I do this by showing that his view entails an understanding of the tradition of political philosophy that cannot do justice to that tradition's own understanding of the character of technology. I consider first Plato and Aristotle and then Hobbes and Locke in order to suggest that Heidegger's view that modern politics are stamped by technological metaphysics can be challenged on two related grounds: (1) it assumes incorrectly that the tradition is dominated by dogmatic metaphysics; (2) it prevents us from seeing how some in the tradition both understood and doubted the possibility of a technological stamp. I then suggest an alternative view of technology that might account better for the character of technology and political life.

show abstract

On the Sovereign Authorization

Cited by 55 publications

References 6 publications

Decisiveness as a logic of political action

Decisiveness as a logic of political action

Citizens into wolves? Carl Schmitt’s fictive account of security

Politics and the Problem of Technology: An Essay on Heidegger and the Tradition of Political Philosophy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About