The Freedom to Exclude: The Case of Israeli Society

2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Tamir
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Sphere ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Israeli Society ◽  
Private Sphere ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The Right

The phenomenon of social exclusion in Israel is a vivid demonstration of the Basic Laws' failure to fulfil their integrative role. Despite the ‘constitutional revolution’ and the Supreme Court's ongoing endeavour over the last two decades to instil a bill of rights through its jurisprudence, Israeli society has failed to fully internalise values of equality. In terms of legal jargon, individuals continue to claim and exercise ‘sole and despotic dominion’ over their private property in order to avoid contact with individuals belonging to certain minority groups. In many cases, such behaviour in the private sphere results in exclusion from the public sphere.This phenomenon is especially astonishing considering the fact that many laws in Israel apply the right of equality to the private sphere. Furthermore, the Israeli Supreme Court has developed comprehensive human rights jurisprudence applicable to the private sphere. The gap between the law in the books and the law in action illustrates that effective implementation of human rights in the private sphere cannot be achieved solely by specific legislation or by jurisprudence that is sensitive to human rights. This argument is backed by several recent bills which preserve and enforce the exclusion of minorities, particularly of Arabs, from the public sphere. These bills illustrate that exclusion is indeed a growing phenomenon in Israeli society that cannot be overlooked. Moreover, they underscore the urgent need to entrench a direct obligation to apply human rights to the private sphere at the constitutional level. This will be achieved only when Israel adopts a full constitution.

scholarly journals Social Values in Europe.  Protecting Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Religion, Creating What?: Justice,  Sophia, Phronesis        

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Nickole Papkova Kuyan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Quantum Theory ◽  
Public Sphere ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Instrument ◽  
Freedom Of Thought ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The Right

The multidimentional human rights catastrophe 2020-2021 is input for this writing. We see it as the culmination of arguments about regulating the social values, the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion in Europe (art 9 ECHR) in its broader sense. We question: what are thought, conscience, religion in Europe? The paper aims at revealing how different states bound by ECHR (Italy, France, Russia) are redefining their relationship to thought, conscience and religion, under the challenge of changing minds, increasing religious activism in the public sphere, associated with the spread of new religious movements and Islam; how this process mobilizes a complex array of often unrelated official actors, but also mindful men who want to be recognized by public opinion eager to curb what is perceived as “foreign” or “extremist” expressions of thought, conscience, religion; by politicians navigating between political correctness and populism, by national and external judiciary like ECtHR; how this process is gradually producing a new and common paradigm of the relationship between states, the public sphere and thought, conscience and religion. We scrutinize (re)construction and formatting of thought, conscience and religion in the West through courts, giving the rebirthing to the Lautsi case. We intend to find which doctrine\idea has been developed by the Court in Europe. What will be with judicial decision-making in France and Europe? How to overcome the crisis? We are seeking a new instrument. We go into Mindful Politics/Judiciary, Dharma and Judiciary/Politics. We use the Complex Thinking concept and Quantum Theory, Sophism, Theology, Eastern and Ancient thoughts as Puzzles. We refer to Lady Justice-Prudentia-Sophia and Phronesis. We refer to the decoloniality to re-learn the thoughts-heritage that have been pushed aside, buried, discredited by the forces of modernity: UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold, Vl.Solovjev, Ivan Ilyin. Also we use new data, such as O’Murchu Diarmuid, Doing Theology in an Evolutionary Way (2021), Rovelli Carlo, Helgoland (2020), Molari Carlo, Il cammino spirituale del cristiano (2020), Mancuso Vito, I quattro maestri (2020). Our core topic is the importance of legal ideas and legal doctrine for court decisions. Our core thought is the Russia’s experience in balancing secular and religious values and peaceful coexistence of peoples, it’s importantance for the international community. It’s part of the big research, started in 1990, continued in different ways, at UNIPV (with Prof.J.Ziller) in the framework of CICOPS, in particular. Key terms: human rights and freedom, thought, conscience, religion, pluralism, equality, secularism, neutrality, positivism, legal symbols, Lady Justice, Sophia, Prudentia, Phronesis, quantum theory, Islam, rule of law, legitimacy, historical-interpretive account of judicial politics, complexity.

The Priority of Public Reasons and Religious Forms of Life in Constitutional Democracies

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Cristina Lafont
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Difficult Question ◽  
Political Deliberation ◽  
Forms Of Life ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The Right ◽  
Mutual Accountability

In this essay I address the difficult question of how citizens with conflicting religious and secular views can fulfill the democratic obligation of justifying the imposition of coercive policies to others with reasons that they can also accept. After discussing the difficulties of proposals that either exclude religious beliefs from public deliberation or include them without any restrictions, I argue instead for a policy of mutual accountability that imposes the same deliberative rights and obligations on all democratic citizens. The main advantage of this proposal is that it recognizes the right of all democratic citizens to adopt their own cognitive stance (whether religious or secular) in political deliberation in the public sphere without giving up on the democratic obligation to provide reasons acceptable to everyone to justify coercive policies with which all citizens must comply.

Multicultural differences in the public sphere

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 285-300
Author(s):  
Rudi Visker
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Academic Question ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Private Sphere ◽  
Great Length ◽  
The Public ◽  
Religious Symbols ◽  
Private Realm ◽  
The Public Sphere

The present article plays off two conceptions of the public sphere against one another. The first one sees in it a sign of what is already present in the private sphere, whereas the second regards it as a symbol that has to inscribe its own symbolic force into the private realm. That this is by no means a mere academic question becomes obvious by way of several examples analyzed at great length: the institution of mourning and the discussion about the presence of religious symbols in the public sphere. An argument for considering the Muslim veil as a protection against the divine is put forward in an attempt to clarify the presuppositions of our current predisposal against it. Ultimately, pluralism should perhaps not just be taken to refer only to the presence of others outside of us who we are able to numerically count, but might be the more difficult plight of having to cope with an otherness within each of us. Should the latter be the case, then we are in need of a public sphere where we can leave behind and thus honor what is not only differentiating us from others but also from ourselves.

LEGAL ESSENCE OF ANCIENT PROVERBS AND SAYS AND THEIR SOCIAL SIGNIFICANCE

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Dranishnikova ◽  
Ivan Semenov
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Social Significance ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Moral Standards ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
Status Position

The national legal system is determined by traditional elements characterizing the culture and customs that exist in the social environment in the form of moral standards and the law. However, the attitude of the population to the letter of the law, as a rule, initially contains negative properties in order to preserve personal freedom, status, position. Therefore, to solve pressing problems of rooting in the minds of society of the elementary foundations of the initial order, and then the rule of law in the public sphere, proverbs and sayings were developed that in essence contained legal educational criteria.

Tolerance and Accommodation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori G. Beaman
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Religious Diversity ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Public Sphere

This chapter problematizes the notions and language of tolerance and accommodation in relation to religious diversity, and traces their genealogy both as legal solutions and as discursive frameworks within which religious diversity is increasingly understood in the public sphere. The problem they pose is that they create a hierarchy of privilege that preserves hegemonic power relations by religious majorities over religious minorities. Tolerance in this context might be imagined as the broadly stated value that we must deal with diversity and those who are different from us by tolerating them. Accommodation might be seen as the implementation of this value—that in order to demonstrate our commitment to tolerance we must accommodate the ‘demands’ of minority groups and those individuals who position themselves or align themselves with minorities.

Fighting Corruption

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Arena
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Roman Republic ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Private Sphere ◽  
The Public ◽  
Republican Rome ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
Late Roman

Corruption was seen as a major factor in the collapse of Republican Rome, as Valentina Arena’s subsequent essay “Fighting Corruption: Political Thought and Practice in the Late Roman Republic” argues. It was in reaction to this perception of the Republic’s political fortunes that an array of legislative and institutional measures were established and continually reformed to become more effective. What this chapter shows is that, as in Greece, the public sphere was distinct from the private sphere and, importantly, it was within this distinction that the foundations of anticorruption measures lay. Moreover, it is difficult to defend the existence of a major disjuncture between moralistic discourses and legal-political institutions designed to patrol the public/private divide: both were part of the same discourse and strategy to curb corruption and improve government.

scholarly journals Kepemimpinan Perempuan di Ruang Publik dalam Tafsir Al-Kasysyâf

Al-Ulum ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 459-480
Author(s):  
Sulaiman Ibrahim
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Women's Leadership ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The Right

This paper explores al-Zamakhshari's thoughts on women's leadership in the public sphere in tafsir al-Kasysyaf's . Islam does not require the wife to submit to her husband as he is obliged to submit to God. On the contrary, with the existence of rights that must be fulfilled by the husband towards the wife, then as reciprocity of Islam gives the right for the husband to be obeyed as long as it does not conflict with the teachings of religion. However, in terms of leadership in the public sphere, az-Zamakhsyarîy is more likely to place the position of women under men. This is evident in his expression when interpreting the word فضل الله بعضهم علي بعض that leadership is given by Allah to men because of its advantages in several respects, even az-Zamakhsyarîy considers men to have many advantages over women

scholarly journals The Normativity of Habermas’s Public Sphere from the Vantage Point of Its Evolution

2019 ◽  
pp. 47-65
Author(s):  
Maciej Hułas
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Private Property ◽  
The Public ◽  
Age Of Reason ◽  
Unique Character ◽  
Classical Setting ◽  
Bourgeois Culture ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
The Individual

The paper argues that the original normativity that provides the basis for Habermas’s model of the public sphere remains untouched at its core, despite having undergone some corrective alterations since the time of its first unveiling in the 1960s. This normative core is derived from two individual claims, historically articulated in the eighteenth-century’s “golden age” of reason and liberty as both sacred and self-evident: (1) the individual right to an unrestrained disposal of one’s private property; and (2) the individual right to formulate one’s opinion in the course of public debate. Habermas perceives the public sphere anchored to these two fundamental freedoms/rights as an arena of interactive opinion exchange with the capacity to solidly and reliably generate sound reason and public rationality. Despite its historical and cultural attachments to the bourgeois culture as its classical setting, Habermas’s model of the public sphere, due to its universal normativity, maintains its unique character, even if it has been thoroughly reformulated by social theories that run contrary to his original vision of the lifeworld, organized and ruled by autonomous rational individuals.     

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document