Political Behavior

The paper starts with a theoretical reinterpretation of some classical topics in the public choice literature, where specific elements of contract theory and the theory of the firm are introduced. By putting into contact these completely different fields of economics, it defines a general theoretical framework for political behaviors whose implications go beyond those determined by the standard self-interest assumption. Political organizations, as suppliers of public policies, are supposed to maximize a residual quantum consisting in the public authority that can actually be exercised after all the electoral commitments, with voters and interests groups, have been fulfilled. This residual right—which can be seen also as a degree of discretion necessary for ruling parties to deal with unforeseen contingencies—is based on the reputational capital (goodwill) accumulated over time by political organizations and represents the intangible asset that secures voters’ loyalty and, consequently, the legitimacy to exercise public authority in the long run. When a deficit of goodwill occurs, a chain of “exit” strategies by voters can lead to undesirable results unless an effective “voice” option for citizens exists.

When I first became interested in in-depth case-study research, I was trying to understand how power and rationality shape each other and form the urban environments in which we live (Flyvbjerg, 1998). It was clear to me that in order to understand a complex issue like this, in-depth case-study research was necessary. It was equally clear, however, that my teachers and colleagues kept dissuading me from employing this particular research methodology.

Taken together, the works of Jurgen Habermas and Michel Foucault highlight an essential tension in modernity. This is the tension between the normative and the real, between what should be done and what is actually done. Understanding this tension is crucial to understanding modern democracy, what it is and what it could be. It has been argued that an effective way of making democracy stronger is to strengthen civil society. This article contains a comparative analysis of the central ideas of Habermas and Foucault as they pertain to the question of democracy and civil society. More specifically, the discourse ethics of Habermas is contrasted with the power analytics and ethics of Foucault evaluating their usefulness for those interested in understanding, and bringing about, democratic social change.

"CALL FOR BOOK CHAPTERS: "MAPPING THE ALTERNATIVE MEDIA IN TURKEY"

Editors: Barış Çoban & Bora Ataman

Extended Deadline for abstracts:
January 1st 2013

http://alternativemediamap.net/

We aim to map the alternative media in Turkey, which is varied in form, structure and working styles such as “cracks”, “rhizomes” and “fronts”. Similarly to what has occurred with the mainstream media, both large and small examples of the alternative media, alongside their widespread prevalence inside the country, have also already transcended the national borders. We argue that mapping the alternative media, embracing newspapers, radio and television channels, cinemas, blogs, forums and platforms, essentially the full range of conventional and new media organs and vehicles, is one of the most useful research approaches to comprehending the nature of alternative politics in Turkey.

The alternative media works as a source of memory and an archive helping to understand the historical and current structure of alternative politics in Turkey. IT also gives voice to alternative ideologies and politics and makes their political activities visible. In addition, the alternative media, which mainly represents the “otherised”, oppressed and marginalised groups, forms the vanguard of struggle against the hegemony and barbarism of the oppressive, globalized neo-liberal society.

Alternative media, as an umbrella term, applies to those media organs which are typically bottom up organisations. In principle, their organizational structures and decision making processes are democratic, participatory, polyphonic and dialogic. Their opposition to the mainstream media finds its roots, in its form and content, in social and political struggles and is based in radical ideologies such as anarchism, radical democracy and Marxism. The existence of alternative media indicates the struggle to construct a truly democratic and free sphere of communication from a number of broad perspectives, varying from the idea of simply being independent from either the state or capital, to being completely opposed to them. In this context, it is also possible to claim that every organ of the alternative media, as a centre of subaltern resistance, is part of a greater alternative communication network.

This so-called alternative network (or networks) is/are the voice of different political or social groups, communities, minorities or even individuals at the grassroots level. Thus, they open the way for these groups to actively participate in political and social life, as either real “agents” or as “spectacles” in the field of symbolic struggle. Therefore, individuals or groups can find opportunities to get involved in both real and symbolic struggles for hegemony, not only as consumers, but also as producers; as active agents.

Therefore, alternative media institutions either on the micro- or macro-scale cannot be considered as combatants solely at the informational level. In addition to their struggle to gather, record and spread news and ideas concerning local, national and transnational problems, they also provide a response to the establishment through real political actions. It is not unusual to see their active participation in protests, or even note that they hold the leadership positions in the organisation of some of these dissident political actions. Therefore, their active struggle with the hegemonic powers can also be considered as an effort to create alternative political forms. More commonly however, alternative media operate as the symbolic production centre of alternative politics and as an incubation ground for the intellectual and ideological constructs of social movements.

Alternative media, along with other dissident institutions, are seen as paving the way for a brighter and more just future by being the voice of the voiceless and contributing to the imagining of a different world. Threatening so-called representative democracy by supporting participatory social, cultural and political activities is also deemed useful to this end. By engaging in such activities, they may be able to cause the transformation of political culture in general. More importantly, however, the ways in which subordinate constituents of the society interpret politics and their own means of participation could change in a positive manner. Moreover, such efforts may also lead to the construction of efficient counter-public spheres alongside the more common examples of alternative spaces.
Diverse anti-systemic, reformist and revolutionary ideological orientations, varied political discourses and different modes of action constituting the alternative media landscape mostly open up an opportunity for the “oppressed” to actively participate in these alternative political spaces that are, to a certain extent, diverse, colourful, vivid and, most importantly, innately dialogic.
In this context, we argue that the “duty” of academia should be to understand these alternatives without stigmatizing them as the source of conflicts within the prevailing social system. After all, we as editors, would like to study these initiatives since the imagining of an alternative world may only be possible by embracing the oppressed and their voice, even though the world around us is not particularly welcoming.

Abstracts of papers are sought on topics such as:
• Radical- militant media (affiliated with revolutionary organizations)
• Radical media (Struggling within legal parameters to push the limits of the existing system
• Identity and rights-based media (Human rights, labour and trade-union rights, gender, environment, ethnicity, struggles based on faith or denomination
• Transnational and diaspora-based alternative media
• Independent, objective, opposition media
• Dissident voices, “cracks” in the mainstream media

However, it should be noted that the categories above do not refer to independent categories with clear differences. It is possible to say that; most examples of the alternative media operating in Turkey can be included under more than one of the rubrics mentioned above. Nevertheless, the alternative media organs in Turkey, despite a degree of permeability in the boundaries that separate them, may be seen as belonging more to one or another of the above-mentioned classifications, therefore, these categories will constitute the book’s chapters.

Furthermore, we are mainly interested in the case studies (comparative if possible) and empirical research possessing theoretical and methodological clarity, and focusing on at least one of three basic dimensions of media studies; such as “Production”, “Text”, or “Audience”, without missing the multi-layered and intertwined relationships between these dimensions.

Abstracts of a maximum of 250 words in Turkish and English outlining the topic, theoretical and methodological approach as well as the research question, should be submitted to either Barış Çoban (bcoban@dogus.edu.tr) or Bora Ataman (bataman@dogus.edu.tr) until January1st 2013.

Announcement of the abstracts selected will be made by February 1 2013.

The deadline for full paper submissions is August 1, 2013

The editors are planning to publish book in Turkish and English and have made an agreement with Yordam, to publish in January 2014.

After the evaluation of the abstracts, negotiations with foreign publishing houses will begin for the English version.
Barış Çoban & Bora Ataman (Eds.)
Extended Deadline for Research Proposals: January 1st, 2013"

Back cover text: Making Social Science Matter presents an exciting new approach to social science, including theoretical argument, methodological guidelines, and examples of practical application. Why has social science failed in attempts to emulate natural science and produce normal theory? Bent Flyvbjerg argues that the strength of social science is in its rich, reflexive analysis of values and power, essential to the social and economic development of any society. Richly informed, powerfully argued, and clearly written, this book provides essential reading for all those in the social and behavioral sciences.

It is widely assumed that citizens are myopic, weighing policies’ short-term consequences more heavily than long-term outcomes. Yet no study of public opinion has directly examined whether or why the timing of future policy consequences shapes citizens’ policy attitudes. This article reports the results of an experiment designed to test for the presence and mechanisms of time-discounting in the mass public. The analysis yields evidence of significant discounting of delayed policy benefits and indicates that citizens’ policy bias towards the present derives in large part from uncertainty about the long term: uncertainty about both long-run processes of policy causation and long-term political commitments. There is, in contrast, little evidence that positive time-preferences (impatience) or consumption-smoothing are significant sources of myopic policy attitudes.

The article first describes characteristics of major infrastructure projects. Second, it documents a much neglected topic in economics: that ex ante estimates of costs and benefits are often very different from actual ex post costs and benefits. For large infrastructure projects the consequences are cost overruns, benefit shortfalls, and the systematic underestimation of risks. Third, implications for cost–benefit analysis are described, including that such analysis is not to be trusted for major infrastructure projects. Fourth, the article uncovers the causes of this state of affairs in terms of perverse incentives that encourage promoters to underestimate costs and overestimate benefits in the business cases for their projects. But the projects that are made to look best on paper are the projects that amass the highest cost overruns and benefit shortfalls in reality. The article depicts this situation as ‘survival of the unfittest’. Fifth, the article sets out to explain how the problem may be solved, with a view to arriving at more efficient and more democratic projects, and avoiding the scandals that often accompany major infrastructure investments. Finally, the article identifies current trends in major infrastructure development. It is argued that a rapid increase in stimulus spending, combined with more investments in emerging economies, combined with more spending on information technology is catapulting infrastructure investment from the frying pan into the fire.

Back cover text: If the new fin de siècle marks a recurrence of the real, Bent Flyvbjerg’s Rationality and Power epitomizes that development and sets new standards for social and political inquiry. The Danish town of Aalborg is to Flyvbjerg what Florence was to Machiavelli: a laboratory for understanding the real workings of power, and for grasping what they mean to our more general concerns of social and political organization. Politics, administration, and planning are examined in ways that allow  a rare, in-depth understanding. The reader witnesses, firsthand, the classic and endless drama which defines what modernity and democracy are and can be.

On 25 January 2011, Egyptians took to the streets demanding political and social reform. In Cairo, protesters converged upon Tahrir (‘Liberation’) Square, which remained constantly occupied until the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak on 11 February. In this narrative, the author recounts his experiences over 12 days as a participant in what is now referred to as the Egyptian revolution. He concludes with reflections on the situation that emerged in the square, focusing in particular on some of the factors that may have contributed to the success of its continued occupation: the swift creation of an embryonic form of community, and the receding of the usual identities based on class and religion in favour of a simple yet powerful identity as people of the revolution.