scholarly journals Globalna sprawiedliwość a problem imigracji

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 41-54
Author(s):  
Łukasz Mirocha
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
The Other ◽  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Standard Theory ◽  
Economic Dimension ◽  
Minimal Standard ◽  
Justice Theories

Global justice and the problem of immigrationModern legal philosophy provides us with two main types of global justice theories. Distributive or egali­tarian theories claim that justice requires striving to achieve the global equality from us not only in legal but also economic dimension. On the other hand, there are many theories focusing on providing and keeping only „minimal standard” i.e. human rights and questioning the global equality as an ideal. In the article I investigate which type of theories describes contemporary international relations in the most accurate way claiming that „minimal standard” theory does it and I also wonder which type is more legitimate. In my opinion, considerations devoted to the question of global justice give us a well-established background for further studies on immigration policy, especially in the context of recent EU frontiers incidents.

Human Rights in Iran: The Ethnography of ‘Others’ and Global Political Theory

2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christien Van Den Anker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Change ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Diaspora Literature ◽  
Direct Relevance ◽  
Specific Country

Knowledge about the ‘other’ is one of the founding pillars for the development of global political theory. Although human rights are an important part of the moral and legal discourse on global governance, there is still a gap between these theories and detailed accounts of human rights violations and the context for resistance. This article examines the treatment of the ‘other’ in a specific country (Iran), and the oppression as Muslims of Iranians living abroad, in order to begin to fill this gap. More specifically, it is argued that anthropology, journalism and diaspora literature about Iran provide useful input for the field of global political theory on human rights, democratisation and global justice. This literature helps bring home the realities of human rights violations, contributes to a better understanding of injustice and ways of creating social change, and illuminates issues of universality and difference that are of direct relevance to global political theory.

The Judicialization of International Law

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Courts ◽  
General Frame ◽  
Future Potential ◽  
The One ◽  
Law Making

International relations are increasingly judicialized by the increasing number of international courts and tribunals. On the one hand this judicialization of international law is hailed as a glimmer of more effective and legitimate world governance promoting human rights, justice, and peace. On the other hand critics highlight how sovereignty is increasingly constrained by international courts, and question the effectiveness, legitimacy, and future potential of these courts and tribunals. This book maps and assesses this development and the mixed reactions thereto, presenting the aspirations which international courts and tribunals (ICs) are living up to, and where they fall short. The first Part provides a general frame for these legitimacy concerns. It discusses the general functions of ICs; how they are governed; and possible alternatives to ICs. The second Part considers how the ICs appear to present their judgments in ways that legitimize them vis-à-vis states and other stakeholders; their inner workings; as well as their law-making role. The following Parts consider the various forms of backlash several of the ICs experience, and how the ICs, states, and civil society seek to respond to these challenges. The last Part deals with the fragmentary character of the international judiciary. An epilogue looks to the future of international judicialization.

National Self Determination and Justice: Rawls and Tagore

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-139
Author(s):  
Biraj Mehta Rathi
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Cultural Diversity ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Jacques Derrida ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Cultural Exchange ◽  
The Other ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Rabindranath Tagore ◽  
Post Colonial

Abstract This essay is a study on national self-determination and justice from the differing perspectives of John Rawls and Rabindranath Tagore. Both thinkers have addressed the problem of conflict caused by national loyalties. Influenced by Immanuel Kant’s philosophy of cosmopolitanism, John Rawls articulates the “Law of People(s)” that suggests that mutual consent consists in economic interdependence among nations and tolerance for cultural diversity under monitored conditions of the international relations. Such an arrangement is not inclusive as it excludes the subaltern perspectives and reinforces the hierarchies between East and West. Tagore offers post-colonial versions of nationalism and cosmopolitanism that call for a creative and spiritual unity of nations through cultural exchange where each is equal in dialogue. The essay makes a case for Tagore’s cosmopolitanism being more inclusive than Rawls, yet, limited in its accommodation of the “other” as Tagore’s creative unity domesticates this “other” on the basis of spiritual familiarity. The essay also critiques Martha Nussbaum’s cosmopolitanism that suggests reconciliation of both. It makes a case for a paradoxical understanding of hospitality, friendship and otherness theorized by Jacques Derrida (influenced by Kant) as the basis of self-determination and global justice.

Basic Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Shue
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Forest Fires ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Original Publication ◽  
Fortieth Anniversary ◽  
Basic Rights ◽  
Subsistence Rights

Since its original publication, this book has proven increasingly influential to those working in political philosophy, human rights, global justice, and the ethics of international relations and foreign policy, particularly in debates regarding foreign policy's role in alleviating global poverty. The book asks: Which human rights ought to be the first honored and the last sacrificed? It argues that subsistence rights, along with security rights and liberty rights, serve as the ground of all other human rights. This classic work, now available in a thoroughly updated fortieth-anniversary edition, includes a substantial new chapter examining how the accelerating transformation of our climate progressively undermines the bases of subsistence like sufficient water, affordable food, and housing safe from forest-fires and sea-level rise. Climate change threatens basic rights.

Contrasting Theories of Global Justice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Prah Ruger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Global State ◽  
Ethical Guidelines ◽  
Moral Framework ◽  
Normative Foundation ◽  
Justice Theories ◽  
Health Justice ◽  
Global Health Justice

Theories of global justice fall into four main perspectives: realism, particularism, social contractarianism (society of states), and cosmopolitanism. But health justice remains largely unheeded in these justice theories. More recently, some theorists have turned to health; the perspective most frequently used to ground health obligations is the human rights view. Yet all these frameworks fall short of providing the necessary normative foundation for global health justice. Nor does global bioethics as a discipline address global health justice adequately. Health-sphere actors—global, state, and non-state—need to understand their interests more comprehensively. A more fully developed moral framework and ethical guidelines are essential if health-sphere actors are to tackle global health problems effectively.

Charles Beitz, Political Theory and International Relations

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Bertoldi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Dominant Mode ◽  
Difference Principle ◽  
Political Autonomy ◽  
International Political Theory ◽  
International Anarchy

Charles Beitz’s Political Theory and International Relations (PTIR) played a pioneering role for contemporary international political theory by bringing together two domains of inquiry that had proceeded largely independently from each other in the twentieth century. This chapter will assess PTIR’s contributions to international political theory and explore its continuing relevance for debates on sovereignty, human rights, and globalization in a plural world. After reviewing the ways in which PTIR shaped the evolution of both international relations theory and political theory by questioning the central assumptions of international anarchy and political autonomy and by establishing cosmopolitanism as the dominant mode of analysis for international political theory with its groundbreaking argument for a global difference principle, the chapter will conclude by identifying several productive tensions in Beitz’s work that can further enrich contemporary discussions of global justice.

Reckoning with the past

2006 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 334-336
Author(s):  
Peter M. Siavelis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Scholarly Research ◽  
The Past ◽  
Subsequent Trial ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Rare Opportunity

Augusto Pinochet's unexpected 1998 London arrest provided a rare opportunity for a trial of a former head of state outside his own country for crimes committed while in office. The drama and visibility of the arrest and subsequent trial also prompted a wave of scholarly research on the case and its consequences. Among a crowded field, Naomi Roht-Arriaza's book stands out for doing much more than simply recounting the Pinochet story or discussing its significance for international law. Her meticulously researched book goes beyond a simple focus on the Pinochet case per se, to artfully weave together the series of interactions that helped the case possibly transform transnational global justice. In the process, she provides insights for students of law, democratization, human rights, and international relations.

Does Global Justice Require More than Just Global Institutions?

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-31
Author(s):  
Kok-Chor Tan
Keyword(s):  
Global Justice ◽  
The Other ◽  
Global Institutions ◽  
Institutional Approach ◽  
The One ◽  
Necessary And Sufficient ◽  
Strong Reading

The ‘institutional approach’ to justice holds that persons’ responsibility of justice is primarily to support, maintain, and comply with the rules of just institutions. Within the rules of just institutions, so long as their actions do not undermine these background institutions, individuals have no further responsibilities of justice. But what does the institutional approach say in the non-ideal context where just institutions are absent, such as in the global case? One reading of the institutional approach, in this case, is that our duties are primarily to create just institutions, and that when we are doing our part in this respect, we may legitimately pursue other personal or associational ends. This ‘strong’ reading of our institutional duty takes it to be both a necessary and sufficient duty of justice of individuals that they do their part to establish just arrangements. But how plausible is this? On the one hand this requirement seems overly inflexible; on the other it seems overly lax. I clarify the motivation and context of this reading of the institutional duty, and suggest that it need not be as implausible as it seems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document