William McBride

L’article constitue un examen critique de la crise du règne de la loi dans le contexte politique actuel aux Etats-Unis. Le texte cite quelques exemples de la politique nationale et internationale américaine en rapport avec le « culte de la démocratie ». L’article se divise en deux parties. La première se penche sur, dans l’ordre : l’attitude officielle des Etats-Unis vis-à-vis de la législation internationale, ensuite vis-à-vis du pouvoir de l’institution de la présidence et enfin vis-à-vis du rôle de la Cour suprême. La seconde partie examine quelques conséquences philosophiques de la politique américaine, liées aux questions de la démocratie et du règne de la loi

Članak je kritičko preispitivanje krize u vladavini zakona u kontekstu suvremene politike u SAD. Tekst navodi neke primjere američke nacionalne i vanjske politike u svezi s tzv. ‘kultom demokracije’. Članak je podijeljen na dva dijela. Prvi se dio bavi izvješćem, koje se bavi, redom, službenim odnosima SAD prema međunarodnom zakonodavstvu; zatim prema moći institucije predsjedništva; te glede uloge Vrhovnoga Suda. Drugi dio ispituje neke filozofijske implikacije američke politike, a u svezi s pitanjima demokracije i vladavine zakona

Der Artikel hinterfragt kritisch die Krise in der Gesetzesherrschaft im Kontext der zeitgenössischen US-Politik. Es werden einige Beispiele der US-amerikanischen Innen- und Außenpolitik angeführt, die mit dem sog. ,Demokratiekult’ in Zusammenhang stehen. Der Text beschäftigt sich in seinem ersten Teil mit dem offiziellen Verhältnis der USA zur internationalen Gesetzgebung, des Weiteren mit der Institution des Präsidentenamtes und seiner Macht sowie mit der Rolle des Obersten Gerichtshofes der USA. Im zweiten Teil der Arbeit werden bestimmte philosophische Implikationen der amerikanischen Politik in Bezug auf Fragen der Demokratie und der Gesetzesherrschaft hinterfragt

The article is a critical examination of the crisis in the rule of law in the context of contemporary politics in the USA. It sorts out some examples of American national and foreign policy regarding the so called ‘cult of democracy’. The article is divided in two parts. The first part consists of the report, which concerns, respectively, official US government relationships to international law; the power of the Presidency; and the role of the Supreme Court. The second part examines some philosophical implications of American policy, concerning the questions of democracy and the rule of law

The article is a critical examination of the crisis in the rule of law in the context of contemporary politics in the USA. It sorts out some examples of American national and foreign policy regarding the so called ‘cult of democracy’. The article is divided in two parts. The first part consists of the report, which concerns, respectively, official US government relationships to international law; the power of the Presidency; and the role of the Supreme Court. The second part examines some philosophical implications of American policy, concerning the questions of democracy and the rule of law

The issue that I wish to address is, why protest and criticize the increasing hegemony of what has been called the “culture of consumerism”? This “why not?” objection encompasses three distinct sets of questions. First, is not resistance to it akin to playing the role of King Canute by the sea? Second, is not acceptance of it dictated by the current liberal philosophical consensus that acknowledges and endorses an inevitable diversity in different individuals’ conceptions of what is good, and must not this consensus itself be taken as a given by all who are opposed to political and religious totalitarianisms? Third, does not cosmopolitanism, regarded as a value-orientation favorable to the dissolution or at least minimization of national boundaries and the practices of exclusivity associated therewith, make common cause in the present historical conjuncture with this same trend? I will argue for a “No” answer to all of these questions.