Vet profession must act to protect societal interests

2021 ◽  
Vol 188 (8) ◽  
pp. 315-315
Author(s):  
Pete Orpin
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-541
Author(s):  
Hussein Kassim ◽  
Scott James ◽  
Thomas Warren ◽  
Shaun Hargreaves Heap

In the literature on member state position-taking in the eurozone crisis, the debate has mainly centred on whether national preferences are shaped exclusively within the domestic setting or influenced by shared EU-level norms or interaction within EU institutions. This article goes beyond this discussion. Drawing on original data collected by the authors, it uses the UK’s experience to test the claims both of society-centred approaches, including liberal intergovernmentalism, and perspectives that emphasise the importance of shared EU norms or interaction. It argues that while the first overlook the role of institutions as both actors and mediating variables in preference formation, the second have so far focused on the experience of eurozone members, thereby raising the possibility of selection bias. Treating eurozone form as a series of processes rather than a single event, it contests the claim that preference formation is always driven by societal interests, highlights instances where government acts in the absence of or contrary to expressed societal interests, and reveals limitations of the shared norms critique of liberal intergovernmentalism. It shows that the UK government was driven by a scholars concern to protect the UK economy from financial contagion rather than solidarity with its European partners.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 5211
Author(s):  
Aaron Baugh ◽  
Reginald F. Baugh

In the last 30 years, except for female participation, the enrollment of Latinx, African Americans, Native Americans, Alaskan natives, and disadvantaged students in medical school has been constant; however, increasing enrollment of these minority populations is feasible, if admissions committees make two changes in approach. First, the traditional belief that matriculation merit is a linear function of past academic performance must be rejected. Second, once the threshold needed to complete medical school in four years and to pass licensing examinations at the first attempt has been met, all candidates are equally qualified, and matriculation decisions must be based, in part, on societal interests. In Grutter vs. Bollinger, the United States Supreme Court determined that graduate admission committees can and should consider societal interests. Each admission decision represents a substantial government investment in each student, as the Medicare Act directly subsidizes much of the cost of medical education. As Grutter explained, there is a societal interest in the public having confidence in, and access to, the medical school training that will prepare tomorrow’s medical, professional, and political leaders. Our analysis suggests that medical school admissions are biased towards academic achievement in matriculants, beyond acceptable thresholds for graduation and licensure. We believe medical schools must shift their admissions strategies and consider noncognitive factors in all candidates as determinative once minimum acceptable academic standards have been met.


2021 ◽  
pp. 63-92
Author(s):  
Deborah L. Rhode

This chapter explores ambition for power in politics and the workplace. Control over others can be advantageous in its own right and also in the wealth and recognition that it often confers. Although most politicians link their need for power to the service of public interests, the evidence often suggests otherwise. Drawing on prominent examples, such as Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, John McCain, and Donald Trump, and those who served them, the chapter explores how prioritizing power can subvert principle and the institutional checks necessary to prevent abuse. By contrast, examples such as Nelson Mandela show how those who use power to empower others can serve the highest ideals of social justice. Power in the workplace can also serve stakeholder and societal interests, but it is too often sabotaged by egoistic interests, needs for control, and bullying behaviors. The chapter concludes with strategies to increase accountability for abusive conduct.


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-338
Author(s):  
Wonjae Hwang ◽  
Ian Down

We argue that international trade affects party systems but that this impact is conditioned on the types of societal interests trade brings about. When factor mobility is high, trade promotes class-based grievances that are unlikely to affect the structure of the party system. However, when factor mobility is low, trade will increase the diversity of group interests and policy preferences, thereby pressuring structural change in the party system. A consequence is an increase in the effective number of political parties. The empirical analysis supports these expectations. This paper contributes to our understanding of the political impact of economic liberalization on representative democracy.


1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alon Harel

Disputes over the scope of specific rights, e.g., over the right to free speech, the right to property, or the right to equality, often originate in differing assumptions concerning the reasons that justify the protection of these rights. Thus, those who believe that reasons of autonomy justify the right to free speech will identify the scope of this right differently from those who justify this protection through, say, appeal to the marketplace of ideas. Despite the diverse subject matter of these disputes, there is a uniform structure characterizing them. Some supporters of rights, call them “traditionalists,” locate the reasons that justify the protection of rights within individualistic concerns. Others, call them “revisionists,” deny this traditional claim and argue that rights can be partially or exclusively grounded in societal interests.Traditionalism’ and ‘revisionism’ are terms stipulated to clarify the conceptual difference between two different understandings of rights. These understandings are often implicit in the way the term ‘rights’ is used in political or legal debates concerning the scope of particular rights. At other times, these implicit understandings of the term ‘rights’ are articulated more or less explicitly by moral or political philosophers investigating the nature of rights. Thus, when the terms ‘revisionist’ or ‘traditionalist’ are used in this article, they are used in two different ways. Sometimes, they denote implicit fundamental presuppositions about the nature of rights—presuppositions which underlie many of the contemporary debates over the scope of particular rights. At other times, they denote philosophical theories exploring systematically the nature of rights and the reasons underlying them.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document