The marks of the public choice theory in the modern classical writings<p>Kamu tercihi teorisinin modern klasiklerdeki izleri

Authors

Keywords:

Public choice, social cooperation, theory of state, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Kamu tercihi, sosyal eşgüdüm

Abstract

Public choice, emerged as an economic theory with regard its methodology but focused on political decision making processes and political institutions, has increased its influence on political science in the last twenty years. It is claimed that public choice is a radical disengagement from conventional political studies due to its neo-classical tools applied to politics. But it could also be claimed that public choice has done nothing new but just revived the old topics with a new theoretical tool set, considering the subjects that were examined by the classical political theorists. In this paper, the roots of the subjects examined by public choice theory in the classical writings of the political philosophers are analysed,concerning the problem of social coordination role of the state. These classical thinkers are specified as Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke and Hume. 

 

Özet

Yöntem bakımından ekonomi disiplininden çıkmış olmakla birlikte, konusu itibariyle politik karar süreçlerini ve politik kurumları inceleyen kamu tercihi teorisi, özellikle son yirmi yıldır politika bilimindeki etkinliğini artırmıştır. Kamu tercihinin, neo-klasik iktisadın pek çok aracını politikaya uyarladığı gerekçesi ile geleneksel politika araştırmalarından radikal bir kopuşu temsil ettiği ileri sürülür. Ancak modern politik teorinin bazı klasik filozoflarının ele aldıkları temel konular incelendiğinde, kamu tercihi teorisinin, bu geleneksel sorunsalları yeni teorik kavram setleri ile yeniden canlandırmaktan öte bir iş yapmadıkları da iddia edilebilir. Bu çalışmada devletin ortaya çıkışı ve devletin sosyal işbirliğini sağlamada oynadığı rol üzerinden kamu tercihinin ele aldığı konuların klasik politika yazarlarındaki kökleri incelenmektedir. Bu klasik yazarlar, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke ve Hume olarak belirlenmiştir. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

Buğra Kalkan, Izmir Katip Celebi University

Department of Political and Administrative Sciences, Asistant Professor

Devrim Özkan, Post-doctoral fellow, The University of Buckingham

Dr., The University Buckingham, Max Beloff Centre for the Study of Liberty

References

Aristoteles. (2014) Politika, (Çev.) M. Tunçay, İstanbul: Remzi Kitapevi.

Aristoteles. (2011) Nicomachean Ethics, (R. C. COLLINS, Trans.) Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.

Arslan, A. (2011) İlkçağ Felsefe Tarihi: Aristoteles, İstanbul: Bilgi Üniversitesi.

Brennan, G., & Hamlin, A. (2001) Constitutional Choice, (Ed.) W. F. Shughart, Elgar Companion to Public Choice (pp. 117-139). US: Edward Elgar.

Buchanan, J., & Congleton, R. G. (2006) Politics By Princible Not Interest, Towards Nondiscriminatory Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Buttler, E. (2012) Public Choice, A Primer. London: Institute for Economic Affairs.

Cohen, J. (1986) “Structure, Choice and Legitimacy: Locke’s Theory of the State”, Philosophy&Public Affairs, 15(4): 321-324.

E. C. Pasour, J. (1981) “The Free Rider as a Basis for Government Intervention”. The Journal of Libertarian Studies, 5(2): 453-464.

Fan, D. (1988) Predictions of Public Opinion from the Mass Media: Computer Content Analysis and Mathematical Modeling (Contributions to the Study of Mass Media and Communications). New York, Westport, Cennecticut, London: Greenwood Press.

Gagne, L. (2011) “A Modern Interpretation of Machiavelli’s Political Cycle”. Canadian Political Science Review, 5 (2): 127-135.

Gaus, G. (2012) The Order of Public Reason: A Theory of Freedom and Morality in a Diverse and Bounded World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gunning, J. P. (2005) “Towards a Theory of Evolution of Government”. (Ed.) Stringham E., Anarchy, State and Public Choice. Edward Elgar: London.

Hanjalic, A. (2004) Content-Based Analysis Of Digital Video. New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London, Moscow: Kluwer Academıc Publishers.

Hardin, R. (1997) “Economic Theories of the State”. (Ed.) Mueller D.C. Perpectives on Public Choice, A Hand Book, Londra: Cambridge University Press.

Hardin R. (2003) Liberalism, Constitutionalism, and Democracy, New York: Oxford University Press.

Hayek, F. (2013) Özgürlüğün Anayasası, (Çev.) Yusuf Ziya Çelikkaya,

Ankara: BigBang Yayınları.

Hobbes, T. (1998) Leviathan, (Ed.) J. C. A. Gaskin, New York: Oxford University Press.

Hodgeson, G.M. (2012) “On the Limits of Rational Choice Theory”. Economic Thought, 1(1): 94-108.

Hume, D. (2009 [1738-1740]) İnsan Doğası Üzerine Bir İnceleme, (Çev.) E. Baylan, Ankara: BilgeSu Yayıncılık.

Kleimt, H. (2008) “The Perspective of Philosophy”. (Ed.) Rowley, C. K., Schneider F., Readings in Public Choice and Constitutional Political Economy, New York: Springer.

Krippendorff, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Locke, J. (2002) Political Essays, (Ed.) M. Goldie, Cambridgee: Cambridge University Press.

Machiavelli, N. (2005) The Prince, (Çev.) P. Bondanella, Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

Marciano, A. (2008) “Buchanan’s Constitutional Political Economy: Exchange vs. Choice in Economics and in Politics”, Science and Bussiness Media LLC, 20 (1) 42-56.

Mueller, D. C. (1991) “Public Choice: An Introduction”, (Ed.) Rowley C.K., Schneider F., The Encyclopedia of Public Choice, New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Mueller, D. C. (1997) “Constitutional Public Choice”. In D. C. Mueller, Perspectives on Public Choice, A Hand Book, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Mueller, D. C. (2003) Public Choice III. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo: Cambridge University Press.

Neuendorf, K. (2002) The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Nozick, Robert. (2006 [1974]) Anarşi, Devlet ve Ütopya, Çev. Alişan Oktay, 2. Baskı, Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul.

Ober, J. (2009) “Public Action and Rational Choice in Classical Greek Political Theory”, (Ed.) Balot, R.K., A Companion to Greek and Roman Political Thought, UK: Wiley.

Pennington, M. (2012) Robust Political Economy, Classical Liberalism and the Future of Public Choice. London: Edward Elgar.

Platon (2015 [380]) Devlet, (Çev.) S. Eyüboğlu- M. A. Cimcoz, İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.

Powel, B. (2015) “Public Choice and Leviathan”. (Ed.) Stringham E., Anarchy, State and Public Choice. Edward Elgar: London.

Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. (2008) Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research. Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Assocıates Publishers.

Rowley, C. K. (1991) “Public Choice and Constitutional Political Economy”. (Ed.) Rowley C.K., Schneider F., The Encyclopedia of Public Choice (3-30). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Smith, Adam, 2007 [1776] An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of Wealth of Nations, Metalibri, New York.

Tullock, G. (1967) “The Welfare Costs of Tariffs, Monopolies and Theft”. Western Economic Journal, 5(3), 224-232.

Tullock, G. (2002) Government Failure, A Primer in Public Choice. US: Cato Institute.

Uslu, Cennet. (2007) “Robert Nozick: Anarko-Kapitalizme Karşı Minarkizm”, Liberal Düşünce, 12 (47-48): 143-170.

Willer, D. (1992) “The Princibles of Rational Choice and the Problem of a Satisfactory Theory”, (Ed.) Coleman J. S., Fararo T. J., Rational Choice Theory, Advocacy and Critique, London: Sage Publications.

Winter, D. (1992) “Content Analysis of Archival Materials, Personal Documents, and Everyday Verbal Productions”, (Ed.) C. Smith , Motivation and personality: Handbook of Thematic Content Analysis, Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Downloads

Published

2016-10-11

How to Cite

Kalkan, B., & Özkan, D. (2016). The marks of the public choice theory in the modern classical writings&lt;p&gt;Kamu tercihi teorisinin modern klasiklerdeki izleri. Journal of Human Sciences, 13(3), 3995–4010. Retrieved from https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/4045

Issue

Section

Political Science