The reason of State - Historique des versions

Arthur le 7 juillet 2023 à 09:43

2023-07-07T09:43:31Z

← Version précédente		Version du 7 juillet 2023 à 11:43
Ligne 11 :		Ligne 11 :
	{{hidden		{{hidden
	\|[[Introduction to Political Science]]		\|[[Introduction to Political Science]]
	\|[[~~La pensée sociale d'~~Émile Durkheim et Pierre Bourdieu]] ● [[~~Aux origines de la chute de la République de~~ Weimar]] ● [[~~La pensée sociale de~~ Max Weber et Vilfredo Pareto]] ● [[La notion ~~de «~~ concept ~~» en~~ sciences~~-sociales~~]] ● [[~~Histoire de la~~ discipline ~~de la~~ science ~~politique~~ : ~~théories et conceptions~~]] ● [[~~Marxisme et Structuralisme~~]] ● [[~~Fonctionnalisme et Systémisme~~]] ● [[~~Interactionnisme et Constructivisme~~]] ● [[~~Les théories de l’anthropologie politique~~]] ● [[~~Le débat des trois~~ I : ~~intérêts~~, institutions ~~et idées~~]] ● [[~~La théorie du choix rationnel et l'analyse des intérêts en~~ science ~~politique~~]] ● [[~~Approche analytique des~~ institutions en science ~~politique~~]] ● [[~~L'étude des idées et idéologies dans la~~ science ~~politique~~]] ● [[~~Les théories de la guerre en~~ science ~~politique~~]] ● [[~~La Guerre~~ : ~~conceptions et évolutions~~]] ● [[~~La raison d’État~~]] ● [[~~État~~, ~~souveraineté~~, ~~mondialisation, gouvernance multiniveaux~~]] ● [[~~Les théories de la~~ violence ~~en science politique~~]] ● [[Welfare State ~~et biopouvoir~~]] ● [[~~Analyse des régimes démocratiques et des processus de démocratisation~~]] ● [[~~Systèmes Électoraux~~ : ~~Mécanismes~~, ~~Enjeux et Conséquences~~]] ● [[~~Le système de gouvernement des démocraties~~]] ● [[~~Morphologie des~~ contestations]] ● [[~~L’action dans la théorie politique~~]] ● [[Introduction ~~à la politique suisse~~]] ● [[Introduction ~~au comportement politique~~]] ● [[~~Analyse des Politiques Publiques~~ : ~~définition et~~ cycle ~~d'une politique publique~~]] ● [[~~Analyse des Politiques Publiques~~ : ~~mise à l'~~agenda et formulation]] ● [[~~Analyse des Politiques Publiques~~ : ~~mise en œuvre et évaluation~~]] ● [[Introduction ~~à la sous~~-discipline ~~des~~ relations ~~internationales~~]]		\|[[Intellectual legacy of Émile Durkheim and Pierre Bourdieu in social theory]] ● [[The origins of the fall of the Weimar Republic]] ● [[Intellectual legacy of Max Weber and Vilfredo Pareto in social theory]] ● [[The notion of "concept" in social sciences]] ● [[History of the discipline of political science: theories and concepts]] ● [[Marxism and Structuralism]] ● [[Functionalism and Systemism]] ● [[Interactionism and Constructivism]] ● [[The theories of political anthropology]] ● [[The three I's debate: interests, institutions and ideas]] ● [[Rational choice theory and the analysis of interests in political science]] ● [[An analytical approach to institutions in political science]] ● [[The study of ideas and ideologies in political science]] ● [[Theories of war in political science]] ● [[The War: Concepts and Evolutions]] ● [[The reason of State]] ● [[State, sovereignty, globalization and multi-level governance]] ● [[Theories of violence in political science‎‎]] ● [[Welfare State and Biopower]] ● [[Analysis of democratic regimes and democratisation processes]] ● [[Electoral Systems: Mechanisms, Issues and Consequences]] ● [[The system of government in democracies]] ● [[Morphology of contestations]] ● [[Action in Political Theory]] ● [[Introduction to Swiss politics]] ● [[Introduction to political behaviour]] ● [[Public Policy Analysis: Definition and cycle of public policy]] ● [[Public Policy Analysis: agenda setting and formulation]] ● [[Public Policy Analysis: Implementation and Evaluation]] ● [[Introduction to the sub-discipline of international relations]] ● [[Introduction to Political Theory]]
	\|headerstyle=background:#ffffff		\|headerstyle=background:#ffffff
	\|style=text-align:center;		\|style=text-align:center;
	}}		}}



	The "raison d'État" refers to a principle of governance according to which the State has the right and the obligation to take decisions that are in the supreme interest of the country, even if these decisions are contrary to other considerations, such as moral, religious or international laws. In practice, the raison d'Etat has often been used to justify actions that would otherwise be considered immoral or illegal. For example, a government might justify declaring war, spying or suspending certain civil liberties in the name of raison d'État.		The "raison d'État" refers to a principle of governance according to which the State has the right and the obligation to take decisions that are in the supreme interest of the country, even if these decisions are contrary to other considerations, such as moral, religious or international laws. In practice, the raison d'Etat has often been used to justify actions that would otherwise be considered immoral or illegal. For example, a government might justify declaring war, spying or suspending certain civil liberties in the name of raison d'État.

Arthur : /* USA PATRIOT Act : Implications pour la raison d'État */

2023-06-22T21:04:05Z

USA PATRIOT Act : Implications pour la raison d'État

Voir les modifications

Arthur : /* Authorisation for the use of military force in 2001 */

2023-06-22T21:02:04Z

Authorisation for the use of military force in 2001

← Version précédente		Version du 22 juin 2023 à 23:02
Ligne 206 :		Ligne 206 :
	When a state is faced with an emergency or imminent danger, it may have to invoke what is known as "raison d'État" or a state of emergency to take extraordinary measures to protect the security and integrity of the nation. However, these extraordinary measures can sometimes deviate from the traditional principles of the rule of law, which can raise important questions about the balance between security and individual freedoms. Indeed, in such cases, there may be a tendency to favour emergency action and response to the immediate threat, sometimes at the expense of normal legal protections and procedural safeguards. This can lead to a situation where the normal rules of public law are set aside in the name of emergency management. This situation can be a source of tension and debate, as it puts at stake the fundamental values of democracy and the rule of law, such as respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.		When a state is faced with an emergency or imminent danger, it may have to invoke what is known as "raison d'État" or a state of emergency to take extraordinary measures to protect the security and integrity of the nation. However, these extraordinary measures can sometimes deviate from the traditional principles of the rule of law, which can raise important questions about the balance between security and individual freedoms. Indeed, in such cases, there may be a tendency to favour emergency action and response to the immediate threat, sometimes at the expense of normal legal protections and procedural safeguards. This can lead to a situation where the normal rules of public law are set aside in the name of emergency management. This situation can be a source of tension and debate, as it puts at stake the fundamental values of democracy and the rule of law, such as respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

	Le 9 ~~novembre~~ 2001, Stephen John Byers ~~déclarait « c’est un très bon jour pour faire ressortir et passer en douce toutes les mesures que nous devons prendre<ref>Steve Byers~~, ministre du Commerce anglais du gouvernement de Tony Blair avait envoyé un courrier une heure après le drame « C'est un très bon jour pour faire ressortir et passer en douce toutes les mesures que nous devons prendre. » p. 549~~</ref> »~~.~~Cette déclaration met en évidence un~~ point de tension ~~important dans les~~ situations ~~d'urgence ou d'exception~~. ~~En réponse à une crise~~, ~~les gouvernements peuvent être tentés de faire passer rapidement des mesures qui pourraient~~, ~~dans des circonstances normales~~, ~~faire l'objet d'un débat~~ public ~~approfondi et de contrôles démocratiques~~. ~~Dans certains cas~~, ~~ces mesures peuvent inclure des lois ou des réglementations qui limitent les libertés individuelles~~, ~~augmentent les pouvoirs de l'État ou modifient d'autres~~ aspects ~~de la gouvernance et de l'ordre~~ public. ~~Bien que ces mesures puissent être justifiées par la gravité de la~~ situation, ~~elles soulèvent des~~ questions ~~importantes sur la transparence~~, ~~la responsabilité et le~~ respect ~~des principes démocratiques~~. ~~Il est~~ crucial ~~que même dans les~~ situations ~~d'urgence~~, ~~les gouvernements s'efforcent de maintenir l'État de droit~~, ~~de respecter les droits de l'homme et de s'engager de manière transparente avec le~~ public. ~~En outre~~, ~~les mesures prises en réponse à une situation d'urgence devraient être proportionnées~~, ~~nécessaires et sujettes à un examen régulier pour s'assurer qu'elles restent appropriées et justifiées~~.		On 9 November 2001, Stephen John Byers declared that "it is a very good day to bring out and sneak in all the measures we need to take", p. 549. This statement highlights an important point of tension in emergency or exceptional situations. In response to a crisis, governments may be tempted to rush through measures that would, in normal circumstances, be subject to full public debate and democratic scrutiny. In some cases, these measures may include laws or regulations that restrict individual freedoms, increase the powers of the state or alter other aspects of governance and public order. While the gravity of the situation may justify such measures, they raise important questions about transparency, accountability and respect for democratic principles. It is crucial that even in emergency situations, governments strive to uphold the rule of law, respect human rights and engage transparently with the public. In addition, measures taken in response to an emergency should be proportionate, necessary and subject to regular review to ensure that they remain appropriate and justified.

	~~Les attentats du~~ 11 ~~septembre~~ 2001 ~~ont conduit à une série de changements significatifs dans les législations et politiques~~, ~~en particulier aux États-Unis~~, ~~mais aussi à l'échelle internationale~~. ~~Le besoin perçu de protéger les citoyens contre de futures attaques terroristes a conduit à l'~~adoption ~~de mesures qui~~, ~~dans certains cas~~, ~~ont restreint les libertés civiles et modifié les normes en matière de vie privée~~, de surveillance ~~et de droits de l'homme~~. ~~L'une des réponses les plus controversées à ces attaques a été l'adoption du~~ USA PATRIOT Act ~~aux États-Unis~~, ~~qui a élargi les pouvoirs de~~ surveillance ~~du gouvernement américain dans le but de prévenir le terrorisme~~. ~~Bien que ces mesures aient été prises dans le but déclaré de protéger la sécurité nationale~~, ~~elles ont également suscité de vives inquiétudes concernant leur~~ impact ~~sur les libertés civiles et le respect de la vie privée~~. ~~Dans ce contexte~~, ~~le débat démocratique peut être confronté à des défis~~. ~~Il est~~ important ~~que même en temps de crise~~, ~~la transparence~~, ~~la responsabilité et le~~ respect ~~des droits de l'homme soient maintenus~~. ~~Il s'agit d'un délicat équilibre à trouver entre la protection de la sécurité nationale et la préservation des principes démocratiques fondamentaux~~.		The attacks of 11 September 2001 led to a series of significant changes in legislation and policy, particularly in the United States, but also internationally. The perceived need to protect citizens from future terrorist attacks has led to the adoption of measures which, in some cases, have restricted civil liberties and altered standards of privacy, surveillance and human rights. One of the most controversial responses to these attacks was the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act in the United States, which expanded the surveillance powers of the US government with the aim of preventing terrorism. Although these measures were taken to protect national security, they also raised serious concerns about their impact on civil liberties and privacy. In this context, democratic debate can face challenges. It is important that even in times of crisis, transparency, accountability and respect for human rights are maintained. It is a delicate balance to be struck between protecting national security and preserving fundamental democratic principles.

	=== USA PATRIOT Act : Implications pour la raison d'État ===		=== USA PATRIOT Act : Implications pour la raison d'État ===

Arthur : /* Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État */

2023-06-22T21:01:35Z

Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État

← Version précédente		Version du 22 juin 2023 à 23:01
Ligne 192 :		Ligne 192 :
	Switzerland, as a traditionally neutral country, faced its own challenges during the two world wars. In the context of the First World War, on 30 August 1914, the Swiss Federal Assembly gave the Federal Council (the Swiss government) unlimited power to guarantee the security, integrity and neutrality of the country. This decision was taken to enable the government to take the necessary measures quickly and effectively to protect Switzerland from the consequences of the European conflict that was unfolding around it. This was clearly an example of the application of "raison d'État", where the ordinary rules of democratic governance were temporarily suspended in response to an extraordinary situation. It is a clear illustration of the concept of a state of exception, albeit one exercised with the aim of preserving Switzerland's neutrality and independence rather than engaging it in conflict.		Switzerland, as a traditionally neutral country, faced its own challenges during the two world wars. In the context of the First World War, on 30 August 1914, the Swiss Federal Assembly gave the Federal Council (the Swiss government) unlimited power to guarantee the security, integrity and neutrality of the country. This decision was taken to enable the government to take the necessary measures quickly and effectively to protect Switzerland from the consequences of the European conflict that was unfolding around it. This was clearly an example of the application of "raison d'État", where the ordinary rules of democratic governance were temporarily suspended in response to an extraordinary situation. It is a clear illustration of the concept of a state of exception, albeit one exercised with the aim of preserving Switzerland's neutrality and independence rather than engaging it in conflict.

	== Le 11 ~~septembre et le retour de la~~ raison ~~d’État~~ ==		== 11 September and the return of the raison d'État ==

	=== ~~Autorisation de recours à la~~ force ~~militaire de~~ 2001 ===		=== Authorisation for the use of military force in 2001 ===

	~~Après les attentats du~~ 11 ~~septembre~~ 2001, ~~le président américain~~ George W. Bush ~~a déclaré que l'intégrité de la~~ nation ~~avait été attaquée~~. ~~Cette déclaration était basée sur le fait que les attentats terroristes étaient assimilés à un acte de guerre~~. ~~Dans ce contexte~~, ~~le président a invoqué le~~ concept de "raison d'~~État~~", ~~suggérant qu'une réponse extraordinaire était nécessaire pour faire face à cette~~ situation ~~extraordinaire~~. ~~Cette réponse a pris la forme de l'"~~Authorization for Use of Military Force" (AUMF), ~~qui a été votée par le Congrès américain peu de temps après les attaques~~. L'AUMF ~~a donné au président l'autorité de prendre toutes les~~ "~~mesures nécessaires et appropriées~~" ~~contre ceux qu'il déterminerait avoir~~ "~~planifié~~, ~~autorisé~~, ~~commis ou aidé~~" ~~les attaques du~~ 11 ~~septembre~~. ~~En outre~~, l'administration ~~Bush a mis en place des mesures de sécurité intérieure draconiennes~~, ~~comme le~~ Patriot Act, ~~qui a étendu les pouvoirs du gouvernement en matière de~~ surveillance ~~et d'enquête~~. ~~Ces mesures~~, ~~bien que controversées~~, ~~ont été présentées comme essentielles pour protéger la~~ nation.		After the attacks of 11 September 2001, US President George W. Bush declared that the integrity of the nation had been attacked. This declaration was based on the fact that the terrorist attacks had been likened to an act of war. In this context, the President invoked the concept of "raison d'Etat", suggesting that an extraordinary response was required to deal with this extraordinary situation. This response took the form of the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which was passed by the US Congress shortly after the attacks. The AUMF gave the President the authority to take all "necessary and appropriate measures" against those he determined to have "planned, authorised, committed or aided" the attacks of 11 September. In addition, the Bush administration introduced draconian homeland security measures, such as the Patriot Act, which extended the government's powers of surveillance and investigation. These measures, although controversial, were presented as essential to protect the nation.

	~~Suite aux attentats du~~ 11 ~~septembre~~ 2001, ~~le président~~ George W. Bush a ~~répondu en plaçant la défense de la nation américaine comme une nécessité primordiale~~. ~~Dans ses discours~~, ~~il a présenté les agresseurs non pas comme de simples terroristes~~, ~~mais comme un ennemi~~ comparable ~~à une~~ nation, ~~ce qui a eu pour effet paradoxal d~~'~~élever la~~ stature ~~d'Oussama Ben Laden~~. ~~En effet~~, ~~en assimilant~~ Al-~~Qaïda à un État-nation~~, Bush ~~a implicitement crédité Ben~~ Laden ~~du statut de chef d'État~~. ~~Cette approche~~ a ~~également justifié une réponse militaire~~ massive, ~~plutôt qu'une approche policière et judiciaire pour faire face à un~~ crime. ~~Cela a conduit à l'~~invasion ~~de l'~~Afghanistan ~~et à la Guerre contre le Terrorisme~~, ~~une campagne militaire à l'échelle mondiale qui~~ a ~~profondément affecté les~~ relations ~~internationales et les politiques intérieures aux États-Unis~~.		Following the attacks of 11 September 2001, President George W. Bush responded by making the defence of the American nation a paramount necessity. In his speeches, he presented the attackers not as mere terrorists, but as an enemy comparable to a nation, which had the paradoxical effect of elevating Osama Bin Laden's stature. Indeed, by equating Al Qaeda with a nation-state, Bush implicitly credited Bin Laden with the status of head of state. This approach also justified a massive military response, rather than a police and judicial approach to dealing with a crime. This led to the invasion of Afghanistan and the War on Terror, a global military campaign that has profoundly affected international relations and domestic politics in the United States.

	~~En qualifiant les attaques du~~ 11 ~~septembre~~ 2001 ~~comme un~~ "~~acte de guerre~~", George W. Bush a ~~établi une~~ justification ~~pour l'~~application ~~de la~~ raison d'~~État~~. ~~L'acte de guerre est une~~ condition ~~qui autorise l'utilisation de la~~ raison d'État, ~~car il constitue une~~ situation ~~d'exception~~, ~~une circonstance extraordinaire qui demande des mesures extraordinaires~~. ~~La raison d'État~~, ~~dans ce contexte~~, ~~permet au gouvernement de prendre des décisions et d'agir d'une manière qui pourrait être contraire aux lois et aux principes habituels dans l'intérêt suprême de la~~ nation. ~~Cela pourrait inclure des~~ actions ~~telles que la déclaration de guerre~~, ~~la mobilisation des~~ forces ~~militaires~~, ~~l'instauration de mesures de sécurité internes renforcées~~, ~~et d'autres mesures extraordinaires qui pourraient être perçues comme nécessaires pour assurer la sécurité et l'intégrité de la~~ nation.		By describing the attacks of 11 September 2001 as an "act of war", George W. Bush established a justification for the application of raison d'état. An act of war is a condition that authorises the use of raison d'État, because it constitutes an exceptional situation, an extraordinary circumstance that calls for extraordinary measures. Reason of State, in this context, allows the government to take decisions and act in a way that could be contrary to the usual laws and principles in the supreme interest of the nation. This could include actions such as declaring war, mobilising military forces, introducing enhanced internal security measures, and other extraordinary measures that may be perceived as necessary to ensure the security and integrity of the nation.

	~~Lorsque~~ George W. Bush ~~a qualifié les attaques du~~ 11 ~~septembre~~ 2001 ~~comme un~~ "~~acte de guerre~~", il a ~~légitimé, en quelque sorte,~~ Al~~-Qaïda et son chef~~, ~~Ben~~ Laden, ~~comme des acteurs de guerre traditionnels~~. ~~Cette déclaration a, de fait, changé le paradigme de l'~~application ~~de la~~ raison d'~~État~~. ~~Cela a permis à l'~~administration ~~Bush de justifier l'~~application ~~de la~~ raison d'~~État, en prenant des mesures extraordinaires pour la défense de la~~ nation, ~~allant de la guerre en~~ Afghanistan ~~à la mise en place de nouvelles mesures de sécurité intérieure~~. ~~Cette déclaration~~ a ~~marqué un tournant dans l'histoire contemporaine~~, ~~en introduisant un nouveau~~ type ~~de conflit~~ - la "~~guerre contre le terrorisme~~" - ~~où la frontière entre le droit de la paix et le droit de la guerre devient floue~~.		When George W. Bush described the attacks of 11 September 2001 as an "act of war", he in a way legitimised Al Qaeda and its leader, Bin Laden, as traditional actors of war. This declaration effectively changed the paradigm for the application of raison d'état. It allowed the Bush administration to justify the application of raison d'état by taking extraordinary measures to defend the nation, ranging from the war in Afghanistan to the introduction of new homeland security measures. This declaration marked a turning point in contemporary history, introducing a new type of conflict - the "war on terror" - where the line between the law of peace and the law of war becomes blurred.

	~~Lorsqu'un État est confronté à une situation d'urgence ou à un~~ danger ~~imminent~~, ~~il peut être amené à invoquer ce que l'on appelle la~~ "raison d'État" ~~ou l'état d'exception pour prendre des mesures extraordinaires afin de protéger la sécurité et l'intégrité de la~~ nation. ~~Cependant~~, ~~ces mesures extraordinaires peuvent parfois s'écarter des principes traditionnels de l'État de droit~~, ~~ce qui peut soulever des~~ questions ~~importantes sur l'équilibre entre la sécurité et les libertés individuelles~~. ~~En effet~~, ~~dans de tels cas~~, ~~il peut y avoir une tendance à favoriser les actions d'urgence et la réponse à la menace immédiate~~, ~~parfois aux dépens des~~ protections ~~juridiques normales et des garanties de procédure~~. ~~Cela peut conduire à une~~ situation ~~où les règles normales du droit~~ public ~~sont mises de côté au nom de la gestion de l'urgence~~. ~~Cette~~ situation ~~peut être~~ source de tension ~~et de débats~~, ~~car elle met en jeu les valeurs fondamentales de la démocratie et de l'État de droit~~, ~~comme le~~ respect ~~des droits de l'homme et des libertés fondamentales~~.		When a state is faced with an emergency or imminent danger, it may have to invoke what is known as "raison d'État" or a state of emergency to take extraordinary measures to protect the security and integrity of the nation. However, these extraordinary measures can sometimes deviate from the traditional principles of the rule of law, which can raise important questions about the balance between security and individual freedoms. Indeed, in such cases, there may be a tendency to favour emergency action and response to the immediate threat, sometimes at the expense of normal legal protections and procedural safeguards. This can lead to a situation where the normal rules of public law are set aside in the name of emergency management. This situation can be a source of tension and debate, as it puts at stake the fundamental values of democracy and the rule of law, such as respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

	Le 9 novembre 2001, Stephen John Byers déclarait « c’est un très bon jour pour faire ressortir et passer en douce toutes les mesures que nous devons prendre<ref>Steve Byers, ministre du Commerce anglais du gouvernement de Tony Blair avait envoyé un courrier une heure après le drame « C'est un très bon jour pour faire ressortir et passer en douce toutes les mesures que nous devons prendre. » p. 549</ref> ».Cette déclaration met en évidence un point de tension important dans les situations d'urgence ou d'exception. En réponse à une crise, les gouvernements peuvent être tentés de faire passer rapidement des mesures qui pourraient, dans des circonstances normales, faire l'objet d'un débat public approfondi et de contrôles démocratiques. Dans certains cas, ces mesures peuvent inclure des lois ou des réglementations qui limitent les libertés individuelles, augmentent les pouvoirs de l'État ou modifient d'autres aspects de la gouvernance et de l'ordre public. Bien que ces mesures puissent être justifiées par la gravité de la situation, elles soulèvent des questions importantes sur la transparence, la responsabilité et le respect des principes démocratiques. Il est crucial que même dans les situations d'urgence, les gouvernements s'efforcent de maintenir l'État de droit, de respecter les droits de l'homme et de s'engager de manière transparente avec le public. En outre, les mesures prises en réponse à une situation d'urgence devraient être proportionnées, nécessaires et sujettes à un examen régulier pour s'assurer qu'elles restent appropriées et justifiées.		Le 9 novembre 2001, Stephen John Byers déclarait « c’est un très bon jour pour faire ressortir et passer en douce toutes les mesures que nous devons prendre<ref>Steve Byers, ministre du Commerce anglais du gouvernement de Tony Blair avait envoyé un courrier une heure après le drame « C'est un très bon jour pour faire ressortir et passer en douce toutes les mesures que nous devons prendre. » p. 549</ref> ».Cette déclaration met en évidence un point de tension important dans les situations d'urgence ou d'exception. En réponse à une crise, les gouvernements peuvent être tentés de faire passer rapidement des mesures qui pourraient, dans des circonstances normales, faire l'objet d'un débat public approfondi et de contrôles démocratiques. Dans certains cas, ces mesures peuvent inclure des lois ou des réglementations qui limitent les libertés individuelles, augmentent les pouvoirs de l'État ou modifient d'autres aspects de la gouvernance et de l'ordre public. Bien que ces mesures puissent être justifiées par la gravité de la situation, elles soulèvent des questions importantes sur la transparence, la responsabilité et le respect des principes démocratiques. Il est crucial que même dans les situations d'urgence, les gouvernements s'efforcent de maintenir l'État de droit, de respecter les droits de l'homme et de s'engager de manière transparente avec le public. En outre, les mesures prises en réponse à une situation d'urgence devraient être proportionnées, nécessaires et sujettes à un examen régulier pour s'assurer qu'elles restent appropriées et justifiées.

Arthur : /* Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État */

2023-06-22T21:00:43Z

Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État

← Version précédente		Version du 22 juin 2023 à 23:00
Ligne 193 :		Ligne 193 :

	== Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État ==		== Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État ==

	~~{{Article détaillé\|Les ruptures du 11 septembre 2001}}~~

	=== Autorisation de recours à la force militaire de 2001 ===		=== Autorisation de recours à la force militaire de 2001 ===

Arthur : /* La guerre comme catalyseur de la raison d'État */

2023-06-22T21:00:26Z

La guerre comme catalyseur de la raison d'État

Voir les modifications

Arthur : /* Giovanni Botero (1544 - 1617) : Contribution à la conceptualisation de la raison d'État */

2023-06-22T20:57:16Z

Giovanni Botero (1544 - 1617) : Contribution à la conceptualisation de la raison d'État

Voir les modifications

Arthur : /* Machiavelli (1469 - 1627): Conceptualisation of the reason of State */

2023-06-22T20:55:18Z

Machiavelli (1469 - 1627): Conceptualisation of the reason of State

← Version précédente		Version du 22 juin 2023 à 22:55
Ligne 72 :		Ligne 72 :

	== Machiavelli (1469 - 1627): Conceptualisation of the reason of State ==		== Machiavelli (1469 - 1627): Conceptualisation of the reason of State ==
	~~{{Article détaillé\|La Renaissance italienne}}~~
	[[Fichier:Santi di Tito - Niccolo Machiavelli's portrait.jpg\|thumb\|right\|200px\|His posthumous portrait by Santi di Tito, in Florence's Palazzo Vecchio.]]		[[Fichier:Santi di Tito - Niccolo Machiavelli's portrait.jpg\|thumb\|right\|200px\|His posthumous portrait by Santi di Tito, in Florence's Palazzo Vecchio.]]

	One of the fundamental aspects of Niccolò Machiavelli's political thought, often condensed into the expression "the end justifies the means". In his most famous work, The Prince, Machiavelli argues that ~~to achieve and maintain power,~~ leaders must be prepared to act in ways that might otherwise be considered immoral. However, it is important to note that Machiavelli does not advocate the complete rejection of morality. Instead, he points out that conventional morality can sometimes conflict with the demands of politics. For example, a ruler may need to use deception or force to protect the state. In this context, such actions may be justified if they contribute to a higher end, such as political stability or state security. This ties in with the idea of 'raison d'État', which suggests that in certain exceptional circumstances the state may be justified in taking action that departs from ordinary law or customary norms. However, as Machiavelli himself recognises, this presents a complex ethical and political challenge, as it can be difficult to determine when such action is truly justified and how far it can go. Machiavelli's thought has been the subject of much debate and interpretation over the centuries. Some critics see him as a cynic who advocates amorality, while others see him as a pragmatic realist who ~~simply~~ recognises the dilemmas and challenges of politics. Whatever the case, his ideas have ~~had a profound influence on~~ political theory and continue to fuel discussions on issues such as the raison d'état.		One of the fundamental aspects of Niccolò Machiavelli's political thought, often condensed into the expression "the end justifies the means". In his most famous work, The Prince, Machiavelli argues that leaders must be prepared to act in ways that might otherwise be considered immoral to achieve and maintain power. However, it is important to note that Machiavelli does not advocate the complete rejection of morality. Instead, he points out that conventional morality can sometimes conflict with the demands of politics. For example, a ruler may need to use deception or force to protect the state. In this context, such actions may be justified if they contribute to a higher end, such as political stability or state security. This ties in with the idea of 'raison d'État', which suggests that in certain exceptional circumstances the state may be justified in taking action that departs from ordinary law or customary norms. However, as Machiavelli himself recognises, this presents a complex ethical and political challenge, as it can be difficult to determine when such action is truly justified and how far it can go. Machiavelli's thought has been the subject of much debate and interpretation over the centuries. Some critics see him as a cynic who advocates amorality, while others see him as a pragmatic realist who recognises the dilemmas and challenges of politics. Whatever the case, his ideas have profoundly influenced political theory and continue to fuel discussions on issues such as the raison d'état.

	Machiavelli has often been associated with the idea of cunning or deception as a strategic tool in politics. In 'The Prince', he suggests that rulers, when acting for the good of the state, may have to use concealment or manipulation to achieve their objectives. Guile, in this context, can be understood as a form of strategic intelligence, where an individual or group holds information that others do not, and uses this asymmetry of information to their advantage. This can involve misleading opponents, disguising true intentions or manipulating perceptions to gain a strategic advantage. However, it is important to note that for Machiavelli, the use of cunning is not an end in itself, but a means to a wider end, such as the stability of the state and the protection of the common good. Furthermore, while Machiavelli may seem to support a certain level of deception or manipulation in politics, he also warns that rulers should act with prudence and wisdom, and maintain the trust and respect of their subjects as much as possible.		Machiavelli has often been associated with the idea of cunning or deception as a strategic tool in politics. In 'The Prince', he suggests that rulers, when acting for the good of the state, may have to use concealment or manipulation to achieve their objectives. Guile, in this context, can be understood as a form of strategic intelligence, where an individual or group holds information that others do not, and uses this asymmetry of information to their advantage. This can involve misleading opponents, disguising true intentions or manipulating perceptions to gain a strategic advantage. However, it is important to note that for Machiavelli, the use of cunning is not an end in itself, but a means to a wider end, such as the stability of the state and the protection of the common good. Furthermore, while Machiavelli may seem to support a certain level of deception or manipulation in politics, he also warns that rulers should act with prudence and wisdom, and maintain the trust and respect of their subjects as much as possible.

Arthur : /* Genealogy of the raison d'État */

2023-06-22T20:54:47Z

Genealogy of the raison d'État

Voir les modifications

Arthur le 22 juin 2023 à 20:53

2023-06-22T20:53:17Z

Voir les modifications

The reason of State - Historique des versions

Arthur le 7 juillet 2023 à 09:43

Arthur : /* USA PATRIOT Act : Implications pour la raison d'État */

Arthur : /* Authorisation for the use of military force in 2001 */

Arthur : /* Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État */

Arthur : /* Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État */

Arthur : /* La guerre comme catalyseur de la raison d'État */

Arthur : /* Giovanni Botero (1544 - 1617) : Contribution à la conceptualisation de la raison d'État */

Arthur : /* Machiavelli (1469 - 1627): Conceptualisation of the reason of State */

Arthur : /* Genealogy of the raison d'État */

Arthur le 22 juin 2023 à 20:53

Arthur : /* USA PATRIOT Act : Implications pour la raison d'État */

Arthur : /* Authorisation for the use of military force in 2001 */

Arthur : /* Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État */

Arthur : /* Le 11 septembre et le retour de la raison d’État */

Arthur : /* La guerre comme catalyseur de la raison d'État */

Arthur : /* Giovanni Botero (1544 - 1617) : Contribution à la conceptualisation de la raison d'État */

Arthur : /* Machiavelli (1469 - 1627): Conceptualisation of the reason of State */

Arthur : /* Genealogy of the raison d'État */