Suchergebnisse

Human rights are always a matter of law, but they are increasingly a matter of politics. Much lip-service is paid nowadays to the notion of human rights. At the same time they are being violated all over the world. Peter Baehr presents a succinct introduction to the key theoretical and practical issues that will serve as a useful primer for students and researchers.

The argument of this paper is that the justification of democracy's core principles of popular control over government in conditions of political equality, and the defense of them against paternalist alternatives, requires appeal to basic features of political decision-making and of human nature, respectively -- its capacities and limitations -- which are universal in their scope, and do not stop at borders. It follows that if a democratic form of government is appropriate anywhere, it must be so everywhere, though differences of social structure and historical tradition may make it more difficult to establish and sustain in practice in some countries than in others. However, these common features do not entail uniformity. The fundamental freedoms necessary to popular self-government in any form encourage diversity, and allow it to find full expression in the public sphere. Yet, there is a limit to the movements and beliefs that are compatible with democracy, and that comes when they reject one or other of its core principles. At the same time, some of democracy's characteristic elements -- freedoms of expression and association, electoral competition for office, majoritarian procedures -- can serve to exacerbate societal conflict, especially though not only in newly democratizing countries. In such circumstances only the establishment of a process of inclusive dialogue, involving respect for difference and an understanding of the requirements of political equality, can serve to resolve such conflicts. In other words, a commitment to democracy's core principles is needed to moderate the effects of some of its own typical procedures. Adapted from the source document.

There are three models of postcapitalist societies which claim universal validity: (1) the North American model which is currently popular with many Third World countries, (2) the Marxist-based Soviet model which shares the ideology of consumption, & (3) the Marxist-based Chinese model which denies the usefulness of capitalist consumption & labor organization. Because history demonstrates that class struggle alters the relations of production, & because the superstructure reflects the needs of the economic base, pseudo-Marxists ignore features of base & superstructure relations. Religions function to (A) define the relationship of people with nature, & (B) delineate the relations among social classes. The ancient religion of Egypt, Hinduism, Semitic religions, Islam, & Christianity serve to illustrate the role of religion in the mode & the relations of production. Historical materialism is an alternative to universal barbarism, & with the use of this alternative six modern spheres can be distinguished. They are (a) the European sphere (including North America), (b) the Japanese sphere, (c) the European sphere of socialism, (d) the European sphere of undeveloped capitalism as in Latin America, (e) the sphere of Spain & Mexico, & (f) the African-Asian sphere. The Third World has experienced obstructed transition, & it is only communist East Asians who have freed themselves from it. Even though the models of social organization are similar, communism generates a flexible variety. L. Kamel.