This book explains why elective affinity exists between democratic and non-democratic ideologies and why liberal socialism as a compromise between liberalism and socialism did not succeed in the 20th century. As is shown here, the main reason for such affinity is the self-incurred immaturity of both ideologies. Although both concepts diverged from the beginning, as contenders in the political scene, they gradually became more antagonistic and self-contained. Furthermore, the idea of the self-production of both liberalism and socialism system absorbed their democratic potential and expanded the elective affinity toward authoritarian ideologies and regimes. The book also provides a set of policies of liberal socialism that may serve to remove the liabilities of liberalism and socialism as separate ideologies and policies and produce conditions for democratic and economically sustainable development.

“An extraordinary work of political historical analysis that methodically and convincingly argues for the superiority of a Marxist approach for pursuing democracy. Rich in historical detail and thoroughly engrossing in portraying the real-time analyses of and intervention in crucial events by prominent Marxist and liberal theorists and political actors, Marxism versus Liberalism is a truly impressive achievement that will have an enduring appeal.” —John F. Sitton, Professor Emeritus, Political Science, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA Performing a comparative real-time political analysis, Marxism versus Liberalism presents convincing evidence to sustain two similarly audacious claims: firstly, that Karl Marx and Frederick Engels collectively had better democratic credentials than Alexis de Tocqueville and John Stuart Mill; and secondly, that Vladimir Lenin had better democratic credentials than Max Weber and Woodrow Wilson. When the two sets of protagonists are compared and contrasted in how they read and responded to big political events in motion, this book contends that these Marxists proved to be better democrats than the history’s most prominent Liberals. Exploring the historical scenarios of The European Spring of 1848, the United States Civil War, the 1905 Russian Revolution, the 1917 Russian Revolution, and the end of World War I, Marxism versus Liberalism carefully tests each claim in order to challenge assumed political wisdom.

The idea of finding a 'third way' in politics has been widely discussed over recent months - not only in the UK, but in the US, Continental Europe and Latin America. But what is the third way? Supporters of the notion haven't been able to agree, and critics deny the possibility altogether. Anthony Giddens shows that developing a third way is not only a possibility but a necessity in modern politics.

In this book, Ali Gheissari and Vali Nasr look at the political history of Iran in the modern era, and offer an in-depth analysis of the prospects for democracy to flourish there. After having produced the only successful Islamist challenge to the state, a revolution, and an Islamic Republic, Iran is now poised to produce a genuine and indigenous democratic movement in the Muslim world. Democracy in Iran is neither a sudden development nor a western import, and Gheissari and Nasr seek to understand why democracy failed to grow roots and lost ground to an autocratic Iranian state.

Pierre Elliott Trudeau – radical progressive or unavowed socialist? His legacy remains divisive. Most scholars portray Trudeau’s ties to the left as evidence either of communist affinities or of ideals that led him to found a progressive, modern Canada. The Constant Liberal traces the charismatic politician’s relationship with left and labour movements throughout his career. Christo Aivalis argues that although Trudeau found key influences and friendships on the left, he was in fact a consistently classic liberal, driven by individualist and capitalist principles. While numerous biographies have noted the impact of the left on Trudeau’s intellectual and political development, this comprehensive analysis showcases the interplay between liberalism and democratic socialism that defined his world view – and shaped his effective use of power. The Constant Liberal suggests that Trudeau’s leftist activity was not so much a call for social democracy as a warning to fellow liberals that lack of reform could undermine liberal-capitalist social relations.

This book studies the sources of inequality in contemporary South Korea and the social and political contention this engenders. Korean society is becoming more polarized. Demands for ‘economic democratization’ and a fairer redistribution of wealth occupy centre-stage of political campaigns, debates and discourse. The contributions offer perspectives on this wide-ranging socio-political change by examining the transformation of organized labour, civil society, the emergence of new cleavages in society, and the growing ethnic diversity of Korea’s population. Bringing together a team of scholars on Korea’s transition and democratization, the story the books tells is one of a society acutely divided by the neo-liberal policies that accompanied and followed the Asian financial crisis. Taken together, the contributions argue that tackling inequalities are challenges that Korean policy-makers can no longer postpone. The solution, however, cannot be imposed, once again, from the top down, but needs to arise from a broader conversation including all segments of Korean society. The book is intended for a readership interested in South Korean politics specifically, and global experiences in transition more generally.

Applying John Dewey's philosophy of classical pragmatism to the current liberal/communitarian debate over the dichotomy between a community that is constructed around a particular conception of the good life and a society that is concerned with the protection of individual rights and freedoms, Savage (political science, U. of Science and Arts of Oklahoma) argues that the problems are false dichotomies and wither away when looked at with a Deweyan perspective. Although Dewey himself didn't address these problems, Savage believes that the spirit of his writings remain directly relevant, as Dewey argued that social, political, and economic institutions and norms could be evaluated on the basis of their ability to adapt individual quest for the good life (or self-development) to the objective environmental conditions in which the individual exists. In separate chapters, Savage discusses the relationship between freedom, on the one hand, and virtue, context, objectivity, and authority on the other. Finally, he presents a defense of liberalism, based on the neglected pragmatism of John Dewey. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR