Suchergebnisse

"East Asian Perspectives on Political Legitimacy What makes a government legitimate? Why do people voluntarily comply with laws, even when no one is watching? The idea of political legitimacy captures the fact that people obey when they think governments' actions accord with valid principles. For some, what matters most is the government's performance on security and the economy. For others, only a government that follows democratic principles can be legitimate. Political legitimacy is therefore a two-sided reality that scholars studying the acceptance of governments need to take into account"--

Principles -- Traditional just war theory and humanitarian intervention / Joseph Boyle -- Humanitarian intervention : a conflict of traditions / Anthony Coates -- A duty to protect / Kok-Chor Tan -- Humanitarian intervention as a perfect duty: a Kantian argument / Carla Bagnoli -- Institutions -- Legality and legitimacy in humanitarian intervention / Thomas Franck -- Moralizing humanitarian intervention : why jurying fails and how law can help / Thomas Pogge -- Whose principles? whose institutions? legitimacy problems of humanitarian intervention / Catherine Lu -- Jurying humanitarian intervention and the ethical principle of open-minded consultation -- Brian D. Lepard -- The jury, the law, and the primacy of politics / Melissa S. Williams -- From state sovereignty to human security (via institutions?) / Pratap Bhanu Mehta -- The unavoidability of morality : a commentary on Mehta / Kok-Chor Tan.

Invisible citizens : political exclusion and domination in Arendt and Ellison / Danielle Allen -- Tragic visions, mundane realities : a comment on Danielle Allen's "Invisible Citizens" / Clifford Orwin -- The domination complaint / Philip Pettit -- Pettit and modern Republican political thought / Miguel Vatter -- Against Monism : pluralist critical comments on Danielle Allen and Philip Pettit / Veit Bader -- Reply to Bader and Orwin / Danielle Allen -- In reply to Bader and Vatter / Philip Pettit -- Exclusion and assimilation : two forms of domination in relation to freedom / James Tully -- Liberal foundationalism and agonistic democracy / Michael Blake -- Democracy and legitimacy : a response to James Tully's "Exclusion and Assimilation" / Leif Wenar -- A reply to Michael Blake and Leif Wenar / James Tully -- Inscribing the face : shame, stigma, and punishment / Martha Nussbaum -- The duration of shame "Time Served" or "Lifetime"? / Sanford Levinson -- Genocide's sexuality / Catharine A. MacKinnon

This cross-sectional telephone survey investigates compliance rates in the 42 states and the District of Columbia with legislation restricting tanning bed use in minors.

Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo. All are examples where humanitarian intervention has been called into action. This timely and important new volume explores the legal and moral issues which emerge when a state uses military force in order to protect innocent people from violence perpetrated or permitted by the government of that state. Humanitarian intervention can be seen as a moral duty to protect but it is also subject to misuse as a front for imperialism without regard to international law.In Humanitarian Intervention, the contributors explore the many questions surrounding the issue. Is humanitarian intervention permitted by international law? If not, is it nevertheless morally permissible or morally required? Realistically, might not the main consequence of the humanitarian intervention principle be that powerful states will coerce weak ones for purposes of their own? The current debate is updated by two innovations in particular, the first being the shift of emphasis from the permissibility of intervening to the responsibility to intervene, and the second an emerging conviction that the response to humanitarian crises needs to be collective, coordinated, and preemptive. The authors shed light on the timely debate of when and how to intervene and when, if ever, not to.Contributors: Carla Bagnoli, Joseph Boyle, Anthony Coates, Thomas Franck, Brian D. Lepard, Catherine Lu, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Terry Nardin, Thomas Pogge, Melissa S. Williams, and Kok-Chor Tan

Published: 20 September 2018 ; Much of what political theorists have written about democracy over the past several decades presupposes, implicitly or explicitly, that democratic theorists need be concerned only with the ways in which citizens participate in the decision-making of their own states. In the last decade or so, however, this framework has become subject to increasing critical attention. The visibility of immigration as a public issue has brought into view the fact that every democratic state contains people who live within its boundaries but who are not citizens. Issues like climate change and the globalization of economic activities make it harder to assume that a given state's decisions only affect its own citizens. Finally, various factors have made it harder to ignore the fact that non-state actors like corporations and NGOs often exercise great collective power within and across state boundaries. Whose interests and views should be taken into account in a collective decision? In what ways should their interests and views be taken into account? Why? These are the fundamental questions that Rainer Bauböck has tried to address in a recent book that draws together decades of his thinking and writing about these topics. His original essay was already the subject of several responses in the volume in which it appeared, and this Critical Exchange, which grew out of a panel at the American Political Science Association meeting in 2018, seeks to extend that conversation further. The exchange begins with a brief summary by Bauböck of the book's main themes. This is followed by critical challenges from Sean Gray, Jennifer Rubenstein and Melissa Williams. The exchange concludes with a response from Bauböck to his critics.

Toleration has a rich tradition in Western political philosophy. It is, after all, one of the defining topics of political philosophy-historically pivotal in the development of modern liberalism, prominent in the writings of such canonical figures as John Locke and John Stuart Mill, and central to our understanding of the idea of a society in which individuals have the right to live their own lives by their own values, left alone by the state so long as they respect the similar interests of others. Toleration and Its Limits, the latest addition to the NOMOS series, explores the philosophical nuances of the concept of toleration and its scope in contemporary liberal democratic societies. Editors Melissa S. Williams and Jeremy Waldron carefully compiled essays that address the tradition's key historical figures; its role in the development and evolution of Western political theory; its relation to morality, liberalism, and identity; and its limits and dangers. Contributors: Lawrence A. Alexander, Kathryn Abrams, Wendy Brown, Ingrid Creppell, Noah Feldman, Rainer Forst, David Heyd, Glyn Morgan, Glen Newey, Michael A. Rosenthal, Andrew Sabl, Steven D. Smith, and Alex Tuckness

Moral universalism, or the idea that some system of ethics applies to all people regardless of race, color, nationality, religion, or culture, must have a plurality over which to range - a plurality of diverse persons, nations, jurisdictions, or localities over which morality asserts a universal authority. The contributors to Moral Universalism and Pluralism, the latest volume in the NOMOS series, investigate the idea that, far from denying the existence of such pluralities, moral universalism presupposes it. At the same time, the search for universally valid principles of morality is deeply challenged by diversity. The fact of pluralism presses us to explore how universalist principles interact with ethical, political, and social particularisms. These important essays refuse the answer that particularisms should simply be made to conform to universal principles, as if morality were a mold into which the diverse matter of human society and culture could be pressed. Rather, the authors bring philosophical, legal and political perspectives to bear on the core questions: Which forms of pluralism are conceptually compatible with moral universalism, and which ones can be accommodated in a politically stable way? Can pluralism generate innovations in understandings of moral duty? How is convergence on the validity of legal and moral authority possible in circumstances of pluralism? As the contributors to the book demonstrate in a wide variety of ways, these normative, conceptual, and political questions deeply intertwine.Contributors: Kenneth Baynes, William A. Galston, Barbara Herman, F. M. Kamm, Benedict Kingsbury, Frank I. Michelman, William E. Scheuerman, Gopal Sreenivasan, Daniel Weinstock, and Robin West

This volume introduces Rainer Forst's critical theory of toleration, offering a development of his major work Toleration in Conflict with critical engagement from a range of outstanding interlocutors, including Chandran Kukathas, Melissa S. Williams and Patchen Markell.

This topical book examines the debates around contemporary conflicts between liberal democracies and increasingly vociferous special interest groups within society. It analyses the way a new sense of difference and the growth of multi-culturalism are straining modern notions of citizenship and rights, looking in particular at how ethnic conflicts in Eastern Europe have escalated to international tragedies, while in the US and Canada, race, ethnicity and radical feminism are at the heart of a social conflict which challenges national identity and the unity of the state