أعرض تسجيلة المادة بشكل مبسط

dc.creator Herreros Vázquez, Francisco
dc.date 2007-10-24T07:26:13Z
dc.date 2007-10-24T07:26:13Z
dc.date 2005-05
dc.date.accessioned 2017-01-31T00:57:34Z
dc.date.available 2017-01-31T00:57:34Z
dc.identifier http://hdl.handle.net/10261/1621
dc.identifier.uri http://dspace.mediu.edu.my:8181/xmlui/handle/10261/1621
dc.description Published in: European Journal of Political Theory 5 (4) (2006), pp. 431-451
dc.description In modern political science, repeated elections are considered as the main mechanism of electoral accountability in democracies. More rarely, elections are considered as ways to select “good types” of politicians. In this article it is argued that historical republican authors interpreted elections in this last sense. They view elections as a means to select what they often called the “natural aristocracy”, virtuous political leaders that would pursue the common good. This argument is presented in three steps. First, it is claimed that republican authors did not considered retrospective accountability as one of the goals of electoral processes. Second, I present some evidence concerning the distinction in republican authors between two types of politicians, “good” and “bad”. And, finally, I present some republican arguments about how elections could serve as a device for selecting the “good” politicians.
dc.description Peer reviewed
dc.language eng
dc.relation DT 05-04
dc.rights openAccess
dc.subject Democracy
dc.subject Elections
dc.subject Accountability
dc.subject Politicians
dc.subject Republican tradition
dc.title Screening before sanctioning: elections and the republican tradition
dc.type Documento de trabajo


الملفات في هذه المادة

الملفات الحجم الصيغة عرض

لا توجد أي ملفات مرتبطة بهذه المادة.

هذه المادة تبدو في المجموعات التالية:

أعرض تسجيلة المادة بشكل مبسط