Liberalism and Minority Rights. An Interview
In: Ratio Juris, Volume 12, Issue 2, June 1999, Pages 133–152
9644 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Ratio Juris, Volume 12, Issue 2, June 1999, Pages 133–152
SSRN
In: The Parliamentarian: journal of the parliaments of the Commonwealth, Band 78, Heft 1, S. 92
ISSN: 0031-2282
Introduction --The contemporary Middle East --Minority identities in the Middle East : religious minorities --Minority identities in the Middle East : ethno-national and other minorities --Minority rights in Iraq --Minority rights in Syria --Minority rights in Lebanon --Conclusion.
In: Minority rights publications
In: SWS-Rundschau, Band 45, Heft 2, S. 185-207
'Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, wie Menschen, die in Minderheitenbewegungen aktiv sind, Kultur und andere Quellen von Identität definieren müssen, um diese als politische Ressource nutzen zu können. Sie fordern Gleichberechtigung für Gruppen, die in einer Gesellschaft kulturelle, soziale und wirtschaftliche Nachteile erleben. Es wird dargestellt, dass jene Minderheiten, die sich selbst als homogene Einheiten mit eigener Sprache und Kultur und mit eigenständigen, über Generationen erhaltenen Traditionen beschreiben, die besten Chancen haben, von Staaten und internationalen Organisationen als echte Minderheiten anerkannt zu werden. Das Paradox der Minderheitenrechte soll genau dieses Phänomen beleuchten: Um als echte Minderheit anerkannt zu werden, ahmen die MinderheitenaktivistInnen die in internationalen Minderheitenrechtsinstrumenten festgelegten Normen und Kriterien für Minderheitenrechte nach. Eine Minderheit, die Kultur gemäß einem modernen Verständnis als etwas begreift, das ständigem Wandel unterliegt und auch Unterschiede unter den Mitgliedern der Gruppe betont, hat keine oder geringe Chancen auf Minderheitenschutz und Förderung. Das Rechtsparadox resultiert daraus, dass die Minderheitenschutzinstrumente nicht nur die Kultur und Identität von Minderheiten schützen, sondern auch mit definieren, was schutzwürdig ist.' (Autorenreferat)
SSRN
Working paper
In: Foundations of Democracy
Intro -- Table of Contents -- Series Introduction -- Chapter One: Religion -- Chapter Two: Religious Rights -- Chapter Three: Human Culture -- Chapter Four: Cultural and Human Rights -- Chapter Five: Minority Rights -- Further Reading -- Series Glossary -- Index -- About the Author -- About the Advisor -- Photo Credits.
In: European journal of political theory: EJPT, Band 17, Heft 3, S. 364-374
ISSN: 1741-2730
Alan Patten's Equal Recognition offers a new and powerful argument to support the 'strong cultural rights thesis'. Unlike other culturalist arguments, his argument is not based on a problematic and essentialist conception of culture but on a particular understanding of liberal neutrality as fair treatment and equal recognition. What justifies the existence of such rights is not culture itself but what culture means for people and the negative consequences it can have for them when they form a cultural minority. Patten's argument, however, faces another challenge: I argue that culture and neutrality cannot be fully reconciled, and that, ultimately, the concept of culture might not be playing any significant role in his argument for minority rights.
In: Human rights quarterly: a comparative and international journal of the social sciences, humanities, and law, Band 33, Heft 2
ISSN: 0275-0392
This article explores the difficulties inherent in the conceptualization, legal definition, and use of the term "minorities," framing these issues in the context of global efforts toward human rights realization. It argues that the critical concern is not majority or minority status as such, but rather the construction of dominant positions based upon collectively exclusive elements and the actual abuse of such positions. After delineating the limited role that law can and does play in the actual protection of non-dominant collectivities on the global and national planes, this article urges laying aside the term "minority" as both a label and a concept and reconceptualizing the mission in terms of collective human dignity protection, with this concept's deep roots in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). This might well be linked to the urgently needed operationalization of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Adapted from the source document.
In: Foreign affairs, Band 6, Heft 1, S. 158
ISSN: 0015-7120
In: Human rights quarterly, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 265-303
ISSN: 1085-794X
This article explores the difficulties inherent in the conceptualization, legal definition, and use of the term "minorities," framing these issues in the context of global efforts toward human rights realization. It argues that the critical concern is not majority or minority status as such, but rather the construction of dominant positions based upon collectively exclusive elements and the actual abuse of such positions. After delineating the limited role that law can and does play in the actual protection of non-dominant collectivities on the global and national planes, this article urges laying aside the term "minority" as both a label and a concept and reconceptualizing the mission in terms of collective human dignity protection, with this concept's deep roots in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). This might well be linked to the urgently needed operationalization of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P).
In: International migration review: IMR, Band 30, S. 203-250
ISSN: 0197-9183
In: Israel yearbook on human rights, Band 20, S. 197
ISSN: 0333-5925
In: Contemporary European history, Band 9, Heft 3, S. 385-400
ISSN: 0960-7773
India is a multicultural liberal democratic state. It is also a poor, overpopulated Third World country. Many modernization theorists have assumed that these two descriptors were at odds, or at least sequentially determined with economic development a necessary pre-condition for democracy, and hence predicted the failure of the Indian experiment because of its "fissiparous tendencies." More contemporary comparative political scientists have attempted more sophisticated and nuanced explanations of the Indian experiment than what modernization theorists offered. Also recently political theorists have increasingly turned their attention to multiculturalism. In this paper, I use a particular type of accommodation made by the Indian state to cultural diversity, constitutionally prescribed in the Sixth Schedule for parts of Assam but increasingly applied elsewhere in the northern stretches of Indian territory, to investigate contributions of recent liberal theory to understanding India's multiculturalism. One of the most prominent political theorists in recent times in the West is Will Kymlicka, who weds multiculturalism to liberalism in his liberal theory of minority rights. The mainstay of his theory is his distinction between national minorities and immigrant ethnic groups. Through this distinction he describes and prescribes accommodations made by the liberal state to cultural diversity. Although he admits that there are gray areas or "hard cases" that challenge his categorization, his "approach" has been "to draw clear lines in muddy waters." Can Kymlickian lines be drawn in the sediment-filled streams flowing down from the Himalayas? Do Kymlicka's categories, and, more generally, his theory help us understand India's liberal multiculturalism as practiced in the Himalayan foothills of north India?
BASE