scholarly journals Self-Determination and History in the Third World

1973 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-110
Author(s):  
David C. Gordon
1975 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rupert Emerson

The new Asian and African states have laid much stress on human rights, but have often not lived up to them. The basic right of self-determination has been limited to colonies only. Democratic institutions have generally given way to authoritarian regimes, often run by the military, with popular participation denied rather than encouraged. The right to life, liberty, and security of person has been grossly violated in the cases of millions of refugees, temporary and permanent, in Africa and the Asian subcontinent. Many hundreds of thousands have been killed in domestic conflicts, as in Indonesia, Nigeria, and Burundi. One of the results is the emergence of a double standard: an all-out African and Asian attack upon the denial of human rights involved in colonialism and racial discrimination, but a refusal to face up to massive violations of human rights in the Third World itself.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 301-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Freije

AbstractThroughout the 1970s, journalists and leaders in the Global South organized around the concept of a New International Information Order (NIIO), premised upon the self-determination of news access and production. Though largely forgotten today, the NIIO constituted a key platform of the ‘Third World’ solidarity movement. Latin America was a prominent site for NIIO activism, and this article examines the regional and local meetings that frequently brought together governing officials, reporters, and academics. Focusing on the shifting expectations of exiled Latin Americans living in Mexico City, the article explores the domestic political factors that eventually attenuated enthusiasm for the NIIO. By the late 1970s, Latin American advocates argued that repressive governments could not be trusted to safeguard socially responsible information initiatives, such as regional wire services. Moreover, they underscored that national democratization was necessary before global inequities could be resolved.


Author(s):  
Cheryl Higashida

This introductory chapter describes Black internationalist feminism. Black internationalist feminism challenged heteronormative and masculinist articulations of nationalism while maintaining the importance, even centrality, of national liberation movements for achieving Black women's social, political, and economic rights. As a corollary of the Communist Party's Black Belt Nation Thesis—which prioritized African American struggles for equality, justice, and self-determination—women of the Black Left asserted that Black women had special problems that could not be deferred or subsumed within the rubrics of working-class or Black oppression and that in fact were integral to the universal struggle for human rights and economic freedom. Moreover, women of the Black Left understood that essential to the liberation of African Americans, the Third World, and the worldwide proletariat was the fight against heteropatriarchy, which exacerbated oppression within as well as between nations.


Hypatia ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 135-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ranjoo Seodu Herr

Most Third World feminists consider nationalism as detrimental to feminism. Against this general trend, I argue that “polycentric” nationalism has potentials for advocating feminist causes in the Third World. “Polycentric” nationalism, whose proper goal is the attainment and maintenance of national self-determination, is still relevant in this neocolonial age of capitalist globalization and may serve feminist purposes of promoting the well-being of the majority of Third World women who suffer disproportionately under this system.


Author(s):  
Ulf Johansson Dahre

Ulf Johansson Dahre: Indigenous peoples and the right to self-determination: selfdetermination towards a new meaning? The beginning of the last decade of the 20th century has seen the end of a distinet era in international relations. This era, encompassing the years 1945-1990, was the era of decolonization, in which self-determination was defined or understood in relation to decolonization in the third world. This era also brought a distinet definition of self-determination. Entitled to self-determination were the peoples of European overseas colonies. Minorities and indigenous peoples excluded. However, a redefinition, or an extension of the concept, is ocurring. It is likely that self-determination will become a legal right of indigenous peoples, but not explicitly recognizing secession, but a right to political and social participation within the existing States. In the transition from colonial to postcolonial contexts, self-determination is becoming a means of conflict resolution and a way of pushing for democratic rights, also for indigenous peoples.


2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalana SENARATNE

Internal self-determination is a popular dimension of self-determination in international law. Often regarded as a right to democratic governance, its early promoters were largely Western states and international lawyers. A central observation made by such promoters was that the West favoured internal self-determination while the Third World did not. The present article will argue why this is a misconception and an outdated observation today. However, having argued so, the article proceeds to develop a Third World-oriented constructive critique of internal self-determination, suggesting why the Third World should nevertheless be more critically cautious and vigilant about the promotion of internal self-determination by Western actors as a distinct and concrete right in international law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document