Hart's Contemporary Ideologies

This dissertation explores the presence and influence of demagoguery within the ideological frameworks proposed by H.L.A. Hart, a prominent legal philosopher known for his contributions to legal positivism. The study examines how Hart's theories, particularly those articulated in The Concept of Law, intersect with contemporary ideologies and whether they inadvertently provide fertile ground for demagogic tendencies. The research begins by analyzing Hart's distinction between primary and secondary rules, arguing that his emphasis on rule-based governance could be exploited by demagogues to manipulate legal systems for populist gain. It investigates how Hart's rejection of natural law theories, which tie law to moral principles, might leave room for leaders to appeal to the prejudices and desires of the masses rather than rational deliberation, a hallmark of demagoguery. Drawing on contemporary examples, the dissertation assesses how Hart's ideologies align with modern political movements, particularly those exhibiting demagogic traits such as polarization and scapegoating. It critiques the potential vulnerability of Hart's framework to leaders who prioritize "us vs. them" narratives over inclusive policy-making, a concern echoed in recent political discourse. The study concludes that while Hart's legal positivism offers a robust foundation for understanding law as a social construct, its application in contemporary ideologies requires safeguards against demagogic exploitation. It proposes the integration of deliberative democratic principles to mitigate these risks, ensuring that Hart's theories remain resilient in the face of manipulative rhetoric.