« Human Rights and Universality Introduction " The Universal Declaration is a collection of mumbo-jumbo by disciples of Satan." - Ayatollah Khomeini, Teheran ...» Document abstract
$9.95
13 word format
Language : english
international law
presentation
date published
16/11/2001
review : not yet assessed
level : Advanced
requested 39 times
Summary We'll see that a mediate position can be found between what Donnelly has identified as radical cultural relativism (a) and radical universalism (b). Thus, it seems that a cross-cultural consensus can be found on the universality of some basic rights contained in the UDHR, whereas some other articles may be susceptible of cultural adaptation. But in the first place we will examine the position of cultural relativists and its potential weaknesses and hidden rationals
Table of Contents- The UDHR is a Western conception of human rights (the claim for cultural relativism)
- Human rights: a Western invention
- Human rights as opposed to duties and collective mechanisms
- The accusation of cultural imperialism
- The issue of the hierarchy of rights within the UDHR
- The necessary respect for cultural diversity
- Striving for universalism (the defenders of the UDHR)
- The hidden side of cultural relativism
- The accommodation of universal rights in a non-Western cultural context: the case of Islamic countries
- A way out: 'relative universality' and the recognition of basic rights
Les internautes ont également acheté « In what regards human rights and human security, the legal frame and universality, which enwombs the first, might provide the supporting structure the latter ...» Document abstract
$5.95
6 word format
Language : english
international relations
worksheets
date published
19/10/2004
review : not yet assessed
level : Expert
requested 24 times
Summary The end of Cold War brought new global challenges to the security field. The arousal of new forms of conflict, such as internal wars and terrorism made it important to rethink civilian protection as the centre of this new perspective of security. Threats to security are no longer restricted to states, nor can the state protect its citizens from fear by conventional military action. In his speech appealing for a change in the way we think about security, Sergio Vieira de Mello , underlined the idea that « the security of states and the security of peoples are clearly intertwined, for the insecurity of peoples inexorably leads to the disintegration of states and to regional and international instability »...
Table of Contents- Human Security: a difficult definition.
- Human Security and Human Rights.
- Human Security and Human Development.
« The universality of human rights, the relativity of culture", Michael J. Perry, Roger Williams University Law Review, Vol 10: 349, 04/26/2005 "Why the US's ...» Document abstract
$3.95
4 word format
Language : english
international relations
presentation
date published
25/01/2007
review : not yet assessed
level : General public
requested 6 times
SummaryIn 1998, the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) created both the International Religious Freedom Office in the Department of State and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF). Since this date, a report has been produced every year within the United States, “reviewing and making policy recommendations on the facts and circumstances of religious freedom violations globally”. In other words, it evaluates every country on its “religious freedom”, designates “countries of particular concern” and makes recommandations to the American government. Hence, the United States tend to impose to the whole world its own conception of what should be the relations between Church and State.
This paper will attempt to show why it is very dangerous for the United States to try to evaluate the religious freedom of other countries and to promote “religious freedom” as a foreign policy goal. The United States, whose foundation is linked with the immigration of people fleeing religious persecution in Europe, has a particular conception of religious freedom, which is reflected in the religious clauses of the First amendment to the United States Constitution, stating that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”. I consider that this conception should not, in any case, be used to judge other countries.
This paper will attempt to show why it is very dangerous for the United States to try to evaluate the religious freedom of other countries and to promote “religious freedom” as a foreign policy goal. The United States, whose foundation is linked with the immigration of people fleeing religious persecution in Europe, has a particular conception of religious freedom, which is reflected in the religious clauses of the First amendment to the United States Constitution, stating that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”. I consider that this conception should not, in any case, be used to judge other countries.
Table of Contents- Due to the complexity of this question, which has been resolved in many different ways both in the world and throughout history, it is totally inappropriate to try to evaluate in a unilateral way how the different countries of our world deal with the relations between church and state
- The International Freedom Act of 1998 has strong ideological biases, which makes it an inefficient instrument to judge the religious freedom within foreign countries
« should enhance cooperation on the basis of the condition of humanity and on principles of universality and autonomy. * Cosmopolitanism and human rights In the ...» Document abstract
$6.95
7 word format
Language : english
international relations
presentation
date published
23/04/2004
review : not yet assessed
level : Expert
requested 24 times
Summary Throughout his works J. Habermas has articulated a universalist vision of political life, studying the possibilities of a renewal of democracy in a globalized political environment. With The Postnational Constellation, Habermas focused on the moral and ethical dilemmas of the global postindustrial era, looking for the construction of an inclusive universalist moral framework of mutual understanding...
Table of Contents- From nationalism to constitutional patriotism, from the subject to the citizen
- Calling into question national identity
- Constitutional patriotism
- From the nation-state to the postnational constellation
- The end of nation-state
- Beyond the nation-state : the European Union ?
- A 'world domestic policy'?
- Toward cosmopolitan consciousness
- Cosmopolitan solidarity
- Cosmopolitanism and human rights
- Postmodern philosophy
Les internautes ont également acheté « still serve to remind people of this commitment, which was reinforced by several international treaties proclaiming the universality of human rights. ...» Document abstract
$9.95
11 word format
Language : english
political science
presentation
date published
20/02/2007
review : not yet assessed
level : Expert
requested 32 times
SummaryThis essay deals with one of the most controversial questions in today’s social science debates: the relationship between the nation-state and globalisation. Globalisation, understood quite loosely here as a series of contemporary and unprecedented developments in the economic, social and cultural integration of world market and societies – in other words, a general sense of the shortening of distance between here and there, us and the Other – implies a new definition of the field of social relationships, a definition that is much less centred on the national level and takes more account of the global.
In these conditions, the end of the nation-state may be at hand. According to this view, the nation-state, which has been the only entity of international importance since the Westphalia treaties of 1648, is now the subject of increasing strains. It is doomed to lose more and more of its power in the twenty-first century. In the realm of worldwide action and global participation, how can the territorially limited and ideologically outdated nation-state survive ?
One should always be cautious about seemingly-obvious statements, especially on issues of national reach. Lessons from the past show us that the nation-state has flourished from very sturdy roots, roots that have many times proven stronger than the winds of change. Still, some signs, such as the appearance of many new institutions of global governance, cannot be ignored: what scope remains for the state in the new distribution of power brought about by globalisation ?
I will attempt here to show that the most challenging aspect of globalisation for the nation-state is not economic revolution, contrary to common belief. Indeed integration of world markets adds as many opportunities for states as it does bounds to their sovereignty. Globalisation also means new forms of contacts and exchanges between cultures, making people ever more aware of global issues that concern all of humanity. I will argue that it is in this new “global consciousness” that the greatest threats for the sovereignty and legitimacy of nation-states lie, with one crucial question lying in waiting: will future globalisation be up to the challenge of democracy and accountability?
This essay will be structured around two parts. In the first one, I will tackle the still burning debate of economic globalisation and the fate of the nation-states, taking sides with those who do not want to proclaim the end of the nation-state too soon. In the second part, I will concentrate on more political and social issues, attempting in a few words to show that globalisation requires new forms of democracy that may prove a big challenge to contemporary political organisations.
In these conditions, the end of the nation-state may be at hand. According to this view, the nation-state, which has been the only entity of international importance since the Westphalia treaties of 1648, is now the subject of increasing strains. It is doomed to lose more and more of its power in the twenty-first century. In the realm of worldwide action and global participation, how can the territorially limited and ideologically outdated nation-state survive ?
One should always be cautious about seemingly-obvious statements, especially on issues of national reach. Lessons from the past show us that the nation-state has flourished from very sturdy roots, roots that have many times proven stronger than the winds of change. Still, some signs, such as the appearance of many new institutions of global governance, cannot be ignored: what scope remains for the state in the new distribution of power brought about by globalisation ?
I will attempt here to show that the most challenging aspect of globalisation for the nation-state is not economic revolution, contrary to common belief. Indeed integration of world markets adds as many opportunities for states as it does bounds to their sovereignty. Globalisation also means new forms of contacts and exchanges between cultures, making people ever more aware of global issues that concern all of humanity. I will argue that it is in this new “global consciousness” that the greatest threats for the sovereignty and legitimacy of nation-states lie, with one crucial question lying in waiting: will future globalisation be up to the challenge of democracy and accountability?
This essay will be structured around two parts. In the first one, I will tackle the still burning debate of economic globalisation and the fate of the nation-states, taking sides with those who do not want to proclaim the end of the nation-state too soon. In the second part, I will concentrate on more political and social issues, attempting in a few words to show that globalisation requires new forms of democracy that may prove a big challenge to contemporary political organisations.
Table of Contents- Economic Globalisation and the Role of the State
- Social globalisation and new forms of democracy
« to shoulder the costs of a swelling human surplus, there up to the promise of social justice, universality and a non-discriminating concept of social rights. ...» Document abstract
$7.95
8 word format
Language : english
social sciences
presentation
date published
22/01/2004
review : not yet assessed
level : Expert
requested 17 times
Summary Since the comfortable mixture of economic growth and welfare state expansion has come to an end the welfare state has been subjected to a crisis discussion. Its integrative capacity and its ability to compromise different class interests have been doubted. It was assumed that the higher status groups will express their anti-welfare sentiments within the political arena, whereas the welfare beneficiaries of the lower status sections of the society might be the defenders of the welfare state. In this regard, it was widely assumed that people will support social institutions if they derive benefits from them. The “beneficial involvement” of social groups was seen as the crucial factor for the public standing of the welfare institutions. Special attention was given to the middle classes: “The idea here is that if the middle classes benefit from programmes, then they will not use their not inconsiderable political skills to obtain more resources for those programmes or to defend them in periods of decline” (Goodin/LeGrand, 1987). This essay sets out a comparative frame which charts the attitudinal stances towards the welfare state in Great Britain and Germany...
Table of Contents- Liberal and conservative welfare regimes
- Institutional design and social integration
Les internautes ont également acheté 1
knowledge network
Sort by
Subject :
Type :
Extension :
Language :
Size :