A Liberal Theory of International Law

2000 ◽  
Vol 94 ◽  
pp. 240-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Slaughter
2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 163
Author(s):  
John Morss

Alternatives to the individualistic emphasis of liberal theory focus attention on collective dimensions of social life with implications for legal and political analysis of the state, of representation, and of international law. In this context, relationships between the individual–collective dichotomy and the dichotomy of gender demand attention because of the claimed affiliations of individualism with social understandings of masculinity.


Author(s):  
Michael Zürn

This chapter is a comment on Jean d’Aspremont’s suggestion that the very question of the rise and decline of international law is an expression of liberal thinking as predominant in international law and that the conception of non-state actors depends on liberal theory. While there is no doubt that both the question about the rise and decline of international law and the very concept of non-state actors is compatible with liberal theory, the chapter argues that the connection is much looser than assumed by d’Aspremont. In doing so, this chapter discusses different versions of liberal theory and then goes on to show that different social theories may have varying notions of the law, but most of them are definitely interested in the question of the rise or decline of law. Similarly, the relationship between the rise of international law and non-state actors is multifaceted and of potential interest for liberal, realist, and critical theory.


Author(s):  
Katia Bianchini

This chapter offers an overview of the contribution of anthropology to the study of international refugee law. It starts with a review of the positivist legal approach, which has long dominated the field of international refugee law, with its focus on rules and states, and argues that this approach is unable to fully explain how refugee law is created and how it develops. Two recent strands—the transnational approach and the participatory approach—have criticized the limitations of the positivist approach and emphasized the role of transnational activities and actors in the process of lawmaking. However, these strands remain rooted in a liberal theory of international law, and they do not capture the complexities of the relevant human experiences. The chapter argues that an anthropological approach shifts the focus from states, borders, and citizenship towards the individual by combining and embedding human interpretations, behaviours, cultural contexts, and personal interactions with the law. Moreover, anthropological methods can enrich the understanding of the implementation of refugee law by empirically assessing legal issues. Beyond that, the chapter suggests areas that could benefit from future academic research at the interface of anthropology and refugee law.


2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Friedrich Kratochwil

This article explores the limits of Anne-Marie Slaughter’s liberal theory of (international) law. Despite her admirable interdisciplinary work, Slaughter falls prey to proposing largely technical solutions based on best practices and buttressed by universal norms. She thereby misses the purpose of law as a source of meaning, not to mention the historicity and content-independent authority of law that can be legitimized only politically. Despite all universality, a closer look reveals that the practices of the US are taken to be best practices which then make them part of an imperial project. They are not a means of mediating between the inevitable cultural, political, and historical tensions that are part of our predicament.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document