Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (23)
- Article (12)
- Editorship book (6)
- Contribution to a Periodical (3)
- Working Paper (3)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Lecture (1)
- Journal (1)
Keywords
- Karl Polanyi (3)
- Conflicts law (2)
- Dani Rodrik (2)
- Democracy (2)
- International trade (2)
- Mega-regional trade agreements (2)
- 21st century (1)
- Carl Schmitt (1)
- Citizenship (1)
- Conflicts- law (1)
- Democratic legitimacy (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- European Union countries (1)
- Financial Crises (1)
- Globalisation (1)
- Globalization (1)
- Identity (1)
- Integration trough law (1)
- Jürgen Habermas (1)
- Legitimacy (1)
- Technocracy (1)
- Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (1)
- Voting (1)
Ordoliberalism is a theoretical and cultural tradition of signifi cant societal and political impact in post-war Germany. For a long time the theory was only known outside Germany by a handful of experts, but ordoliberalism has now moved centre stageafter the advent of the fi nancial crisis, and has become widely perceived as the ideational source of Germany's crisis politics.
In this collection, the contributors engage in a multi-faceted exploration of the conceptual history of ordoliberalism, the premises of its founding fathers in law and economics, its religious underpinnings, the debates over its theoretical assumptions and political commitments, and its formative vision of societal ordering based upon a synthesis of economic theories and legal concepts. The renewal of that vision through the ordoliberal conceptualisation of the European integration project, the challenges of the current European crisis, and the divergent perceptions of ordoliberalism within Germany and by its northern and southern EU neighbours, are a common concern of all these endeavours. They unfold interdisciplinary affi nities and misunderstandings, cultural predispositions and prejudices, and political preferences and cleavages. By examining European traditions through the lens of ordoliberalism,the book illustrates the diversity of European economic cultures, and the difficulty of ransnational political exchanges, in a time of European crisis.
Kampf ums Geld
(2017)
European Studies used to be dominated by legal and political science approaches which hailed the progress of European integration and its reliance on law. The recent set of crises that struck the EU have highlighted fundamental problems in the ways and means by which European integration unfolds. The quasi-authoritarian emergency politics deployed in the euro crisis is a radical expression of the fading prevalence of democratic processes to accommodate economic and social diversity in the Union. As we argue in this paper, however, the mainstreams in both disciplines retain a largely affirmative and apologetic stance on the EU's post-democratic and extra-constitutional development. While political science contributions mostly content themselves with a revival of conventional integration theories and thus turn a blind eye to normatively critical aspects of European crisis governance, legal scholarship is in short supply of normatively convincing theoretical paradigms and thus aligns itself with the functionalist reasoning of the EU's Court of Justice. Yet, we also identify critical peripheries in both disciplines which intersect in their critical appraisal of the authoritarian tendencies that inhere in the crisis-ridden state of European integration. Their results curb the prevailing optimism and underline that the need for fundamental reorientations in both the theory and practice of European integration has become irrefutable.
Transnational Constitutionalism is a sociological given and a legal challenge. We observe the emergence of ever more legally-framed transnational arrangements with ever more power and impact. Does this kind of rule ‘deserve recognition’? Is it at all conceivable that the proprium of law can be defended against the rise of its informal competitors? This essay opts for a third way which neither listens to the siren songs on law beyond the state nor to the defences of nation-state constitutionalism as the monopolist of legitimate rule. The alternative submitted suggests that transnational legal ordering of the EU should build upon its re-conceptualisation as a ‘three-dimensional conflicts-law’ with a democracy-enhancing potential. This re-construction operationalises the ‘united in diversity’ motto of the Draft Constitutional Treaty of 2004. It preserves essential accomplishments of Europe’s constitutional democracies. It provides for co-operative problem-solving of transnational regulatory tasks, and it retains supervisory powers over national and transnational arrangements of private governance.
This paper discusses the fundamental tensions between economic globalisation and democratic politics in the field of international trade. New bilateral and regional trade agreements increasingly incorporate other “trade-related” policy areas and threaten to constrain state action and democratic politics. The move towards deeper and more comprehensive trade deals has greatly accentuated grievances and is of exemplary importance in the realms of transnational governance. This article examines the decoupling of these agreements from national and democratic control and the resulting legitimacy impasses of transnational governance based upon the theoretical frameworks of Karl Polanyi and Dani Rodrik. Arguing that politics is not a mistake that gets in the way of markets, we submit our own conceptualisation of transnational legitimacy. In doing so, we suggest a new type of conflicts law which does not seek to overcome socio-economic and political diversity by some substantive transnational regime, but responds to diversity with procedural safeguards, thus ensuring space for co-operative problem-solving and the search for fair compromises.
European Studies used to be dominated by legal and political science approaches which hailed the progress of European integration and its reliance on law. The recent set of crises that struck the EU have highlighted fundamental problems in the ways and means by which European integration unfolds. The quasi-authoritarian emergency politics deployed in the euro crisis is a radical expression of the fading prevalence of democratic processes to accommodate economic and social diversity in the Union. As we argue in this paper, however, the mainstreams in both disciplines retain a largely affirmative and apologetic stance on the EU's post-democratic and extra-constitutional development. While political science contributions mostly content themselves with a revival of conventional integration theories and thus turn a blind eye to normatively critical aspects of European crisis governance, legal scholarship is in short supply of normatively convincing theoretical paradigms and thus aligns itself with the functionalist reasoning of the EU's Court of Justice. Yet, we also identify critical peripheries in both disciplines which intersect in their critical appraisal of the authoritarian tendencies that inhere in the crisis-ridden state of European integration. Their results curb the prevailing optimism and underline that the need for fundamental reorientations in both the theory and practice of European integration has become irrefutable.
In this article, the controversy between the European Court of Justice and the German Federal Constitutional Court over the Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) Programme remains in the background. Rather than summarising and evaluating all this, the Author focuses his attention on a defence of the message in the title. Firstly, he starts with the ruling of the German Court of January 2014, which, as is well known, is the “first reference ever”. In this the Author focuses his attention on the two dissenting opinions by judges Lübbe-Wolff and Gerhardt. Then, the analysis focuses mainly on to the exercise of discretion by the ECB and the role of the judiciary. Thereafter, the Author examines the responses to these developments in various branches of European studies and concludes with an explanation of title.
Was Recht ist, ergibt sich aus dem Gesetz. So lautet das Dogma kontinentaler Rechtswissenschaft. Das Recht sagt nur, was die Juristin denkt, hält die soziologische Jurisprudenz dagegen. Und was sie über das Recht denkt, richtet sich nach ihrem sozialen Kontext und theoretischen Blick auf die Gesellschaft.
Anlässlich Gunther Teubners 70. Geburtstag will dieses rechtssoziologische Fallbuch neuen Gesellschaftstheorien (vorwiegend Systemtheorie, Diskurstheorie und poststrukturalistischen Theorien) einen Weg in die Ausbildungs- und Gerichtspraxis eröffnen. Dazu werden 16 höchstrichterliche Entscheidungen verschiedenster Rechtsbereiche aus sozialwissenschaftlicher Perspektive alternativ gelöst, begründet oder kommentiert.
Die Autoren verwenden Sozialtheorien als experimentelle Modelle für Erklärung und Kritik der Rechtswirklichkeit wie auch als utopische Steinbrüche für eine veränderte Sicht auf rechtliche Institutionen und juristische Argumente. Das Buch entwirft so die pluralistische Landkarte einer neuen Praxis reflexiver soziologischer Jurisprudenz.
This paper discusses the fundamental tensions between economic globalization and democratic politics in the field of international trade governance. The move towards mega-regional trade agreements, as heralded by the controversies over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA), has greatly accentuated grievances and is therefore of exemplary importance in the realms of transnational governance. Based on the theoretical frameworks of Karl Polanyi and Dani Rodrik, we examine the decoupling of these agreements from national and democratic control and the resulting legitimacy impasses of transnational governance. Arguing that politics is not a mistake that gets in the way of markets, we submit our own conceptualization of transnational legitimacy. In doing so we suggest a new type of conflicts law which does not seek to overcome socio-economic and political diversity by some substantive transnational regime but responds to diversity with procedural safeguards, thus ensuring space for cooperative problem-solving and the search for fair compromises.
Business as usual in European private law after the crisis? By no means, this essay argues, private law scholars should become aware that their discipline is deeply affected, albeit more indirectly than in particular in constitutional law, labour law and social law. The crisis has brought to the fore design failure of theory and practice which had remained latent for decades, the most significant substantive being the equation of legal progress with ever more uniformity of formerly national legal orders. The analytical basis of this error is the neglect of the political dimension of markets and their functioning which is reconstructed with the help of Karl Polanyi's economic sociology. In such perspectives it become apparent that the commitment of European private law to market rationality was a Utopian project, which is at odds with the social functions and normative credentials of private law in constitutional democracies. These tensions are aggravating after the quest for competitiveness has become Europe's new 'leitmotif' whic is being pursued rigorously through authoritarian austerity politics against Europe's South. To what degree the new modes of economic governance require formal legal changes in the realms of private law, is of little avail. They damage the societal infrastructures of post-formalist legal ordering. They essay also submits a Polony-inspired counter-vision of market integration and pleads for a defense of social accomplishments through law against authoritarian interventions.