Within the Dutch liberal democracy, a political as well as fundamental tension can be felt between the liberal democracy and Islam. One of the legal examples that can be offered in relation to the...Show moreWithin the Dutch liberal democracy, a political as well as fundamental tension can be felt between the liberal democracy and Islam. One of the legal examples that can be offered in relation to the tension between the liberal democracy and Islam, is the “Temporary Law on Counterterrorism Administrative Measures". This temporary law was put into place in order to fight threats of (Muslim) terrorism, by making it possible to (among other administrative measures) restrict the freedom of movement of a person through an area ban and / or travel ban based on the possible threat they can become, given their religious beliefs and actions (the fear of radicalisation). The question is where to draw the line between protecting society in relation to national security and restricting one’s freedom, based on religious beliefs that go against (some of) the principles of the liberal democracy. The main question of this thesis will therefore be the following: Is it justified for a liberal democracy to enforce administrative sanctions upon its citizens, based on their religious identity? In discussing the place of religion (and religious identity) within the liberal democracy, I will focus on four different approaches: the communitarian consensus, state neutrality, the human nature approach and the overlapping consensus approach. I will argue that none of these approaches offer a justified answer to how Salafi citizens can coexist peacefully with others while living according to the principles of liberal democracy. I will argue, however, that the inability of the Salafi identity to coexist with the ideals of the liberal democracy, does not necessarily justify state interference (by enforcing sanctions upon the Salafi citizens). It is important to look at the actions that follow from ones identity, in order to judge if state interference is justified. Following the three groups identified by Wiktorowicz in his “Anatomy of the Salafi Movement”, I will argue that the state is not allowed to act against purists, the state can use administrative measures to restrict politicos and is allowed to use both administrative as well as criminal measures against jihadis.Show less
In the last 20 years, populism has undoubtedly become a prominent political phenomenon in Europe, manifesting itself in almost every one of its states. Indeed, it has been observed how many...Show moreIn the last 20 years, populism has undoubtedly become a prominent political phenomenon in Europe, manifesting itself in almost every one of its states. Indeed, it has been observed how many populist parties in this region have transitioned from being labelled as “political outsiders”, to becoming among the biggest parties in their respective countries. But why has populism grown so much in such a limited period of time? Among other causes, populism is believed to be a symptom of a malfunctioning of liberal democracy. As modern societies have become increasingly complex and diverse, liberal democratic systems are perceived to be unable to conciliate its two main institutional guarantees, that is, the representation of a popular majority and the protection of minority rights. Populism upholds the representation of the popular will, which, according to populists, has been obscured by an excessive appeasement of different group and minority interests. However, scholars and political theorists have indicated how a populist style of politics can lead to the circumvention of constitutional checks and balances in order to achieve a more efficient representation of the vox populi. This thesis seeks to answer the following question: can populism be considered as beneficial or threatening to liberal democracy? To this end, it will start with an analysis of the nature of populism which will be followed by a theoretical discussion of its potential benefits and threats to liberal democracy. This theory will be put in practice through a case study that compares the Five Star Movement (M5S) in Italy and the National Rally (RN) in France.Show less
This thesis defends the claim that if one recognizes government authority as legitimate based on consent theory, one is committed to recognizing unilateral secession as a primary right. Following...Show moreThis thesis defends the claim that if one recognizes government authority as legitimate based on consent theory, one is committed to recognizing unilateral secession as a primary right. Following from this, it is argued that when western liberal democracies deny this right, they are inconsistent in applying the principles to which they have committed themselves.Show less
This Thesis is a defense for Compulsory Voting. I the light of reasonable pluralism, societies need a moral compromise. In order to faccilitate the forming of a moral compromise widespread...Show moreThis Thesis is a defense for Compulsory Voting. I the light of reasonable pluralism, societies need a moral compromise. In order to faccilitate the forming of a moral compromise widespread political participation is necessary. Compulsory voting faccilitates participation and is thus justifiable.Show less
