From Lifeless Numbers to the Vital Nerve of Democracy: Dolf Sternberger's Metaphorical Argumentation against Proportional Voting

IF 0.7 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Timo Pankakoski
{"title":"From Lifeless Numbers to the Vital Nerve of Democracy: Dolf Sternberger's Metaphorical Argumentation against Proportional Voting","authors":"Timo Pankakoski","doi":"10.1017/s1479244323000161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes Dolf Sternberger's post-World War II argumentation against proportional representation. Sternberger is central in the intellectual history of German democratization. However, he expressed his misgivings about parties and proportionality in a perplexingly antidemocratic register. Proportionality was anonymous, mechanical, dead, and purely mathematical, relying on “mere numbers” and “summing up” as opposed to living, dynamic, and organic political relations—ultimately not a form of political electing at all. Sternberger intentionally mobilized age-old topoi and metaphors which interwar antidemocratic authors had used against parliamentary democracy in its entirety, now skillfully redirecting their force against proportional representation more specifically. Sternberger's intricate metaphorical system linked his anti-proportional views to his theory of active civic engagement and ultimately served pro-democratic aspirations in the altered historical situation. His case exemplifies broader continuities between interwar and postwar discourses and highlights the need to read metaphorical argumentation in historical contexts and pragmatically rather than merely semantically.","PeriodicalId":44584,"journal":{"name":"Modern Intellectual History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern Intellectual History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1479244323000161","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article analyzes Dolf Sternberger's post-World War II argumentation against proportional representation. Sternberger is central in the intellectual history of German democratization. However, he expressed his misgivings about parties and proportionality in a perplexingly antidemocratic register. Proportionality was anonymous, mechanical, dead, and purely mathematical, relying on “mere numbers” and “summing up” as opposed to living, dynamic, and organic political relations—ultimately not a form of political electing at all. Sternberger intentionally mobilized age-old topoi and metaphors which interwar antidemocratic authors had used against parliamentary democracy in its entirety, now skillfully redirecting their force against proportional representation more specifically. Sternberger's intricate metaphorical system linked his anti-proportional views to his theory of active civic engagement and ultimately served pro-democratic aspirations in the altered historical situation. His case exemplifies broader continuities between interwar and postwar discourses and highlights the need to read metaphorical argumentation in historical contexts and pragmatically rather than merely semantically.
从死气沉沉的数字到民主的重要神经:多尔夫·斯滕伯格反对比例投票的隐喻论证
本文分析了道夫·斯特恩伯格在二战后反对比例代表制的论点。斯滕伯格是德国民主化思想史上的核心人物。然而,他表达了对政党和比例的担忧,这是一份令人困惑的反民主登记册。比例是匿名的、机械的、死的、纯粹的数学,依赖于“纯粹的数字”和“总结”,而不是活生生的、动态的、有机的政治关系——最终根本不是政治选举的一种形式。斯特恩伯格有意调动了二战期间反民主作家用来反对议会民主的古老话题和隐喻,现在巧妙地将他们的力量转向更具体地反对比例代表制。斯滕伯格错综复杂的隐喻系统将他的反比例观点与他的积极公民参与理论联系在一起,并最终服务于改变了的历史形势下的亲民主愿望。他的案例体现了两次世界大战之间和战后话语之间更广泛的连续性,并强调了在历史背景下、从实用主义而不仅仅是语义上阅读隐喻论证的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
55
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信