tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3456948.post222155896341575795..comments2024-01-17T23:23:29.732-06:00Comments on Jacob T. Levy: Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3456948.post-70886785110735411952009-01-26T13:30:00.000-06:002009-01-26T13:30:00.000-06:00Paul develops his question in greater depth here.Paul develops his question in greater depth <A HREF="http://uncommon-priors.com/?p=1367" REL="nofollow">here.</A>Jacob T. Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02575549001627195334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3456948.post-74633597660184006302009-01-26T12:53:00.000-06:002009-01-26T12:53:00.000-06:00On your final point, can you say more about how yo...On your final point, can you say more about how you get from pluralism to parties? Can one have pluralism that is not merely a "social given," but is also not instantiated in political parties as such? Perhaps, say, citizens could come to the table with ideologies (drawn from their Rawlsish comprehensive doctrines), and those ideologies could permit them to be understood as bodies of interest and permit a representative to say that she stands in a certain relation to those bodies ("I'm sympathetic to the Catholics"), but without the voters being organized into parties?Paul Gowderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12987034334075962676noreply@blogger.com