Between Utopianism and Realism: The Limits of Partisanship as an Academic Methodology
| DOI | 10.1177/0032321719875947 |
| Date | 01 August 2021 |
| Published date | 01 August 2021 |
| Author | Richard Bellamy |
| Subject Matter | Response |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321719875947
Political Studies
2021, Vol. 69(3) 481 –491
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0032321719875947
journals.sagepub.com/home/psx
Between Utopianism and
Realism: The Limits of
Partisanship as an Academic
Methodology
Richard Bellamy
Abstract
Taking debates about democracy in the EU as an example, Fabio Wolkenstein proposes that
normative theorists should adopt a ‘partisan’ approach that engages with ‘formative agents’ to
advocate for transformative political and societal change, such as the creation of a transnational
democracy at the EU level. He criticises those he calls ‘democratic intergovernmentalists’ for
adopting a ‘first principles’ approach that forecloses both contestation and political agency by
treating the principles underlying the status quo as universal. This comment disputes both the
validity of his criticisms of the work of myself and others, and the coherence of the particular
partisan approach motivating them. At its heart lies a dispute as to the relationship between facts
and principles, and the possibility of a utopian realism of the Rawlsean kind. It is argued that Rawls’
position proves more democratic and plausible and possesses greater critical and political leverage
than Wolkenstein’s partisanship alternative.
Keywords
facts and principles, utopian realism, partisanship, democracy, European Union
Accepted: 22 August 2019
In his critical engagement with some of my work on the European Union (EU) in Political
Studies and elsewhere, Fabio Wolkenstein (2018, 2019a, 2019b) advocates the adoption
of a partisan approach to normative theorising about politics. So far as the future govern-
ance of the EU is concerned, this approach involves engaging with the different views of
‘formative agents’ in the debate about the EU’s democratic legitimacy, and seeking to
advance those views (or that view) that can be best portrayed, in formal terms at least, as
promoting the general interest of European citizens. One can see this approach as being
in some sense an attempt to marry ideal theory to a realist account of political agency,
Department of Political Science, University College London, London, UK
Corresponding author:
Richard Bellamy, Department of Political Science, University College London, Tavistock Square, London
WC1H 9QU, UK.
Email: r.bellamy@ucl.ac.uk
875947PSX0010.1177/0032321719875947Political StudiesBellamy
research-article2019
Response
To continue reading
Request your trial