Suchergebnisse

On peut s'interroger sur l'omniprésence d'un idéal réparateur, compte tenu des exigences du droit et du caractère irréparable de certains drames. Mais ceux qui déposent plainte le font souvent pour d'autres, morts ou vivants, et au nom d'une société plus juste, contribuant à la construction d'un espace démocratique.

La Belgique a adopté sans débat une loi qui rend imprescriptibles les infractions sexuelles commises sur les mineurs. Au lieu de ce populisme pénal, les gouvernants auraient pu renforcer les services publics susceptibles de prévenir les violences.

Atomization of social relations, simultaneous eclipse of authority and tradition, abolition of anthropological limits ... The use made of human rights in contemporary democracies raises serious henceforth of resistances. And are regularly pointed the perverse effects of a 'religion of human rights' in which Europe would recklessly put his heart and his reason. The putative proliferation of rights, which would be similar to an uncontrolled growth of desires, rush, they say, our democracies into a logic of endless claims. We saw during the debates on the 'marriage for all' or were one-point the derivative of a 'grass roots' left a favorable an unlimited extension of rights - whether it be, pele-mele, marriage between persons of the same sex, the right to vote of the foreign or adoption by homosexuals. Adapted from the source document.

At the end of the 1970s, philosopher Claude Lefort emphasised -- against the excessively restrictive Marxist vision -- the political dynamics attached to the affirmation of human rights. This theme has remained predominant in theoretical debate about democracy in France until the present day. A first strand of thought considers the primacy of human rights as a driver of depoliticisation. Authors such as Marcel Gauchet and Pierre Manent have argued that the vitality of the plural society described by Lefort could ultimately backfire on democracy itself. This article argues that this school of thought rests on a narrow conception of rights and an insufficiently dialectical conception of the relationship between rights and practice. Consequently, it defends Lefort's position by relying heavily on a second strand of thought that conceives human rights as the way forward for a radicalisation of democratic ambitions. Adapted from the source document.

At the end of the 1970s, philosopher Claude Lefort emphasised - against the excessively restrictive Marxist vision - the political dynamics attached to the affirmation of human rights. This theme has remained predominant in theoretical debate about democracy in France until the present day. A first strand of thought considers the primacy of human rights as a driver of depoliticisation. Authors such as Marcel Gauchet and Pierre Manent have argued that the vitality of the plural society described by Lefort could ultimately backfire on democracy itself. This article argues that this school of thought rests on a narrow conception of rights and an insufficiently dialectical conception of the relationship between rights and practice. Consequently, it defends Lefort's position by relying heavily on a second strand of thought that conceives human rights as the way forward for a radicalisation of democratic ambitions. © 2012 Political Studies Association. ; SCOPUS: ar.j ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published