Seeing reason or seeing costs? The United States, counterterrorism, and the human rights of foreigners

It is well known that in the wake of 9/11, the United States committed various extraterritorial human rights violations, that is, human rights violations against foreigners outside of its territory. What is less known is that the United States has gradually introduced safeguards that are, at least on paper, meant to prevent its counter-terrorism policies from causing harm to foreigners abroad or, at least, to mitigate such harm. Based on three case studies on the development of safeguards related to torture, targeted killing, and mass surveillance, we show that two mechanisms, coercion and strategic learning, deployed either on their own or in combination, can account for the development of such safeguards. By contrast, we found no evidence of a third mechanism, moral persuasion, having any direct effect. In other words, US policymakers opt to introduce such safeguards either when they face pressure from other states, courts, or civil society that makes immediate action necessary or when they anticipate that not introducing them will, at a later date, result in prohibitively high costs. We did not find evidence of US policymakers establishing safeguards because they deemed them morally appropriate. From this we conclude that, although the emerging norm that states have extraterritorial (and not just domestic) human rights obligations may not have been internalized by key US policymakers, it nevertheless has a regulative effect on them insofar as the fact that relevant others believe in the norm restricts their leeway and influences their cost–benefit calculations.

Changing Hearts and Plates: The Effect of Animal-Advocacy Pamphlets on Meat Consumption

Social movements have driven large shifts in public attitudes and values, from anti-slavery to marriage equality. A central component of these movements is moral persuasion. We conduct a randomized-controlled trial of pro-vegan animal-welfare pamphlets at a college campus. We observe the effect on meat consumption using an individual-level panel data set of approximately 200,000 meals. Our baseline regression results, spanning two academic years, indicate that the pamphlet had no statistically significant long-term aggregate effects. However, as we disaggregate by gender and time, we find small statistically significant effects within the semester of the intervention: a 2.4 percentage-point reduction in poultry and fish for men and a 1.6 percentage-point reduction in beef for women. The effects disappear after 2 months. We merge food purchase data with survey responses to examine mechanisms. Those participants who (i) self-identified as vegetarian, (ii) reported thinking more about the treatment of animals or (iii) expressed a willingness to make big lifestyle changes reduced meat consumption during the semester of the intervention. Though we find significant effects on some subsamples in the short term, we can reject all but small treatment effects in the aggregate.

From Regulation to Moral Persuasion: Child Migration Policy and the Home Office Children’s Department, 1948–1954

This chapter examines the wider policy context and administrative systems for child migration to Australia in the period 1948-1954. With stronger concerns about child migration being expressed by some professional and voluntary organisations in Britain, in 1949 the Home Office began a process of drafting regulations for the emigration of children from the care of voluntary societies. The chapter examines how the process of developing these regulations was delayed through a complex bureaucratic process, with a final draft of the regulations not completed until 1954. Concerns about the legal limitations of these regulations and their effective power in safeguarding child migrants once overseas contributed to a subsequent decision in the Home Office not to introduce them. This decision was also informed by an independent review of child migration to Australia by John Moss, published in 1953, which offered a broadly positive view of this work. The chapter considers why Moss—a former member of the Curtis Committee—took this view, and how broad policy standards such as the Curtis report were, in practice, interpreted and implemented in different ways.

Strategic groups and local railway development in China

PurposeWhat are the mechanisms through which Chinese municipal leaders overcome implementation breakdown? This study, through process tracing, archival work and semi-structured interviews, examines the implementation of three sub-municipal-level railway projects involving the same principals and agents over the same period of time.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis was guided by the hypothesis that political coordination and the exercise of political and Party leadership played an indispensable role in the two cases of successful policy implementation, and its absence accounts for the case of implementation breakdown.FindingsThe principal finding is that an informal “strategic group” was created to “herd” cadres to overcome the problem of implementation. Herding here refers to the idea that Party leadership, through the use of moral persuasion, encourages cadres moving towards a desired common goal and direction.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is limited in the number of secondary resources (government documents and government and media releases) available to the field interviewees, which the author heavily relied on to complete the study.Originality/valueBuilding on the conceptual work of “strategic groups” by Thomas Heberer, Anna Ahlers, and Gunter Schubert, this study makes an empirical contribution by tracing the process through which an informal strategic group exercises its power to overcome implementation breakdown.

Screen Stories: Emotion and the Ethics of Engagement

In this overview and discussion of my recent book, I outline its major topics and arguments and ruminate on its purpose, its implications, and possible objections to the very idea of an ethics of screen stories. Screen stories are narratives that appear on screens, and in this book I focus on long-form screen stories. The book has three parts. Part I develops a theory of the persuasive or rhetorical power of screen stories. Part 2 argues that while one dominant response to that power in film and media studies has been what I call “estrangement theory,” it is in fact an “engagement theory” that offers more promise for the development of an ethics of screen storytelling. Part 3 examines some of the contours of engagement, or, in other words, some of the means by which screen stories engage the viewer in ethical thinking and moral persuasion. There, I focus on character engagement, narrative structure (and especially endings), and narrative paradigm scenarios.

The Deconsolidation of Democracy: Is It New and What Can Be Done About It?

Democracy in the United States and Europe is said to be at the crossroads. I review five recent books that seek to diagnose and cure this ‘crisis’. Explanations range from institutional dysfunction and elite maleficence to technological change and rising economic inequality. Remedies include everything from institutional engineering to moral persuasion. Collectively, the books raise two important questions: is this really a crisis and if it is, can democratisation theory, the branch of political science dedicated to explaining why regimes rise and fall, tell us why? I conclude that if we are to explain the deconsolidation of well-established democracies in which all of the usual pre-conditions had been met, then we must first question the linear narrative about democracy being a naturally legitimate form of regime.

Domination and Disobedience: Protest, Coercion and the Limits of an Appeal to Justice

I offer a conceptual framework for assessing the normative legitimacy of coercive disobedience—involving threats, disruption, force, and deceit—by social movements. A standard liberal view is that while coercion may be required to resist authoritarian regimes, it is illegitimate in a democratic state since it conflicts with majority rule and mutual respect. In restricting disobedience to a form of moral persuasion, this perspective neglects how social power and material interests can distort the conditions for open, fair deliberation. I offer a principled defense of coercive disobedience, not only in repressive states but in plausibly democratic societies. I argue that coercion can be justified on democratic republican grounds as a means to collectively contest objectionable forms of political domination. The use of coercion can be justified as asurrogatetool of political action for those who lack effective participation rights; as aremedialtool to counteract the dominating influence of powerful actors over the process of democratic will formation, and as amobilizationaltool to maintain participation and discipline in collective action. I conclude by proposing democratic constraints on the use of coercive tactics designed to offset the potential movements themselves become a source of arbitrary power.