Double Standards, Racial Equality and the Right Reference Class

1991 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
JONATHAN E. ADLER
Keyword(s):  
Racial Equality ◽  
Reference Class ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
The Right

Randomness and the Right Reference Class

1977 ◽  
Vol 74 (9) ◽  
pp. 501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry E. Kyburg
Keyword(s):  
Reference Class ◽  
The Right

scholarly journals Rapunzel In Developing Economy: A Study About Relationship Between Globalization And Women Workforce Issues In Pakistan

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 225-238
Author(s):  
Roohi Mumtaz ◽  
Syed Shabib ul Hasan ◽  
Afsheen Nizam ◽  
Saima Akhter
Keyword(s):  
Gender Discrimination ◽  
Third World ◽  
Work Force ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Female Labour ◽  
The People ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

As the globalization is bringing change in the business scenarios, there is a need to bring change in the mindset, beliefs, attitude and performance to bring change in the lives of the people. By definition globalization is the multifaceted financial, supporting, civilizing and the geographical development through which the flow of money, companies, innovative approach, talks and the employees have taken a transitional change. Women in third world economies are generally confined under social, cultural, religious and economic boundaries where they are not be allowed to utilize their true potentials and prosper. Under such suppression, businesses mostly prefer female labour, as they remain cheaper and obedient. The paper focuses on the relationship between globalization and the women work force issues in Pakistan. The study also highlights the impact of discriminatory acts like gender discrimination, gender employment segregation and financial biasness in Pakistani society. The findings reveal that discrimination and double standards in the society for women is very common and prevail, more obviously in Pakistan. There is a need to eliminate all the discriminatory elements from the mindset by taking visionary steps in the right direction.

scholarly journals Double Standards Regarding the Attitude of the Contemporary States towards Secession: The Legal Aspect

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-22
Author(s):  
G. N. Andreeva
Keyword(s):  
Legal Aspect ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Combination Synchronization ◽  
The Past ◽  
Negative State ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Attitudes

The constitutions of the majority of the existing states reflect a negative attitude towards secession: from the establishment of a number of constitutional principles (the unity of the nation, the integrity of the state, etc.), which are interpreted by the bodies of constitutional control as directly or indirectly hindering the implementation of secession, to its direct prohibition. Only a small group of constitutions contain provisions allowing secession. Along with this, in the international legal field, wherein the states operate and declare the recognition of the principles thereof, there is a principle of recognition of the right of nations to self-determination. Within the framework of national law the secession, which was a precondition for the existence of the significant number of the contemporary states and, as such, served as the basis for the proclamation and approval of their independence, is considered at the official level as an important and significant event. It is celebrated as official holidays, anniversaries of independence, also states may support customs and traditions that are associated with the secession. The article shows that this “double standards”, applied by a significant part of modern states to past and future secessions is caused by, on the one hand, state obvious interest to preserve integrity, and, on the other hand, the traditions rooted in the past. The doctrine that justifies the strictly negative state attitude towards secession is not ideal, contradictory, based on the currently transforming concepts and theories; thus counter-arguments were developed based on fundamental constitutional theories and research. The diversity and inconsistency of the doctrine forces the contemporary state to either seek a balance between conflicting theories and approaches, or to adhere to one of them — usually not the most actual one. The necessary combination, synchronization of international legal and constitutional legal attitudes towards the regulation of secession can be ensured, first of all, if such regulation is based on the principle of the priority of human rights. At the same time, in contrast to the principle of the sovereign right to dispose of their territories by the states based on the model of property rights, which has feudal roots (which is also being modernized and transformed in the context of globalization), the humanitarian approach to ensure the right of people to self-determination is designed to guarantee the possibility of a free and rational choice of the form of their state existence by regional and local communities.

scholarly journals Double Standards of International Recognition: Right vs. Might?

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 22-34
Author(s):  
D. V. Isachenko
Keyword(s):  
Power Politics ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
State Recognition ◽  
Guiding Principle ◽  
International Recognition ◽  
The Us ◽  
Great Power Politics ◽  
Universal Applicability ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Cold War

Why do some states get recognized, while others are denied the privilege? This article examines the underlying logic behind the contingency and inconsistency in the application of statehood standards to unrecognized, de facto states. When it comes to the practice of state recognition, the article argues, it is not merely a question of Great Power politics. Nor is it a question of whether a state has earned sovereignty and thus has a legally rightful claim to international recognition. Instead, the norms of state recognition can be better understood as a reflection of the balance of powers in the international order, rather than being a guiding principle for assessing claims to statehood. Central to this balance is the question of whether right corresponds with might and vice versa. If such a balance is absent, we observe what are considered to be double standards in the practice of international recognition. The theoretical framework draws on Baruch Spinoza’s idea of right being coextensive with power. Based on this assumption, the article demonstrates that the problem is not the incoherence of norms regulating international recognition, but rather the absence of a necessary equilibrium between might and right to ensure the universal applicability of those norms. The argument is illustrated through a comparison of the right to self-determination that was granted to peoples in former colonies during the Cold War period and the US-led recognition of Kosovo, followed by Russia’s recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in 2008. The article shows that the practice of international recognition is conditional on global responses to particular concerns and circumstances. It is thus contingent on the degree to which powers agree as to how to address these concerns. The key suggestion put forward in the article is that, ultimately, there is no significant conceptual difference between the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples that marked the shift from the achievement of eff ective statehood to eventual independence and the 2008 wave of recognitions for non-colonial cases. Both show that norms and their enforcement depend on the same logic of right and power being mutually constitutive.

scholarly journals Basketball Players Get It and We Don’t! Denying Lebanese Women the Right of Nationality

1970 ◽  
pp. 6-7
Author(s):  
Razan Al-Salah
Keyword(s):  
Lower Class ◽  
Basketball Players ◽  
Citizenship Rights ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Lebanese women, including my mother, suffer from inequality in citizenship rights based on a sexist, racist, and sectarian ‘rule of double standards.’ Being born into a mixed-cultural family, my father Palestinian and my mother Lebanese, they have persistently explained to me how women are considered a lower class of citizenry in Lebanon, particularly under the law.

scholarly journals Sedat Laciner, Mehmet Ozcan and Ihsan Bal: European Union with Turkey: The Possible Impact of Turkey’s Membership on the European Union

ICR Journal ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 536-539
Author(s):  
Christoph Marcinkowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
Turkish Government ◽  
Accession Process ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Turkey’s 22 July 2007 parliamentary elections resulted in a clear victory for the ruling Justice and Development Party, in Turkish known as Adaket ve Kalkinma Partisi or AKP. AKP is part of the right-wing, conservative spectrum of the Turkish political arena. In the West (with the post 9/11 scenario of distrust of anything smacking of ‘Muslim revivalism’) as well as among Turkey’s secular-minded elites and many citizens, the AKP is often perceived as ‘Islamist’ and thus as a danger and detriment to Turkey’s EU membership, regardless of the fact that it had been the AKP government which carried out drastic reforms of its legal and economic, and institutional system. Based on what it views as merely lukewarm support for its accession to the EU and alleged double standards in its negotiations, the Turkish public has become increasingly ‘eurosceptic’ in recent times, as revealed by several surveys. Ankara has been trying desperately to comply with EU legislation and standards, but Brussels has so far refused to back 2013 as a deadline for Turkey’s EU membership. It is believed that the accession process will take at least 15 years, if not longer. In spite of Turkey’s impressive record in terms of moving towards regional integration, the issue of the country’s future EU accession constitutes to date the central controversy of the ongoing enlargement of the EU. Among the Turkish public as well as the present Turkish government (both of which had been rather enthusiastically supportive of the bid for EU membership in the past) significant changes of ‘mood’ in this regard are noticeable.

scholarly journals State Integrity and Self-Determination in a World of Problematic Sovereignty

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergey Markedonov ◽  
Igor Okunev
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
The West ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
The World ◽  
Real Picture ◽  
The Right

This article analyses the phenomenon of states with problematic sovereignty, which has arisen in recent decades, primarily in the former Yugoslavia and the USSR (but not only). The existing model of the world order, in which only UN member countries are recognised as participants in international relations, does not reflect a real picture of the world. At the beginning of the study, the authors examine theoretical approaches (A. Yannis. A. Tsutsiev, A. Sebentsov, V. Kolosov) to typologising entities with problematic sovereignty and territorial principles of national self-determination (i. e. the realisation of the right to self-determination) as well as re-conceptualising sovereignty approaches (J. Agnew and N. Dobronravin). Next, the authors describe how these topics are embedded in the logic of the developing crisis of relations between Russia and the West and lead to a diplomacy of double standards. It is especially emphasised that at different periods and depending on the political state of affairs, both sides in the present-day confrontation supported separatist projects and the preservation of territorial integrity and state unity. This results from contradictions in the system of international law, vague criteria for recognising newly formed independent states, and attempts to use conflicts instrumentally to realise strategic interests. According to the authors, a way out of this impasse could be an agreement between the West and Russia on some general rules of the game, including clearer criteria for the recognition of new states, the legality/illegality of secession, and the preservation of territorial integrity, as well as possible procedures for transition to a new status. However, this is unlikely to happen without reaching a comprehensive compromise or modus vivendi between the main stakeholders. The result of the article is a demonstration on the theoretical and applied levels that in the modern system of international relations, the concept of “territoriality” has become more complicated as a basic characteristic of the state. It now requires new legal and diplomatic approaches to resolve the contradiction between the principles of territorial integrity and the right of nations to self-determination. These new approaches should be developed by the expert community in the course of an unbiased analysis of the contemporary architecture of international relations.

scholarly journals Russian Approaches to the Right of Peoples to Self-Determination: From the 1966 United Nations Covenants to Crimea

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 183-193
Author(s):  
Sevanna Poghosyan
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Current Approach ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Legal Thinking ◽  
The Right

Two moments proved decisive for the development of the right of peoples to self determination in Russia, related to the Soviet approach in the de-colonisation era, as manifested in the 1966 United Nations Covenants, and Russia’s approach to this right after the 2014 annexation of Crimea: with its annexation of Crimea, Russia, just as the Soviet Union had in 1966, challenged the universality of the right to self-determination. The paper examines theory and practice of the right of peoples to self-determination in Russian context from a historical-legal perspective, to trace the roots of the contradictions found in Russia’s current approach to that right. Aimed at understanding the specifics of the Soviet approach to self-determination and considering the case of Crimea in light of analogies between the past and present approaches to the right, the discussion posits the existence of a link between the Soviet and the Russian approach to self-determination, on the basis of legal ties between post-1991 Russia and the Soviet Union established under the doctrine of state succession or continuity. The article offers support for the hypothesis that the current Russian approach to self-determination resembles the Soviet one in demonstrating legal flexibility characterised by self-interest, hypocrisy, and double standards. This calls for renewed discussion of the influence of Soviet international legal thinking on that of contemporary Russia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document