Suchergebnisse

THIS ESSAY SEEKS AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW SOME RELATIVELY FAMILIAR PHILOSOPHICAL VIEWS APPLY TO THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. IT EXPLORES WHAT IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION OF NORMATIVE POLITICAL THEORY CONCERNING THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TODAY: WHAT CLAIMS TO BENEFITS ARE PEOPLE JUSTIFIED IN PRESSING AGAINSTGOVERNMENTS THAT ARE PREOCCUPIED WITH STIMULATING THEEONOMY.

'Global Basic Rights' brings together many of the most influential contemporary writers in political philosophy and international relations to explore some of the most challenging theoretical and practical questions provoked by Henry Shue's classic book 'Basic Rights'.

Human rights have become one of the most important moral concepts in global political life over the last 60 years. Charles Beitz, one of the world's leading philosophers, offers a compelling new examination of the idea of a human right.--. - Source other than Library of Congress.

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Preface -- Introduction -- Part one. International Relations as A State of nature -- 1. The skepticism of the realists -- 2. The Hobbesian situation -- 3. International relation as a state of nature -- 4. The basis of international morality -- 5. From international skepticism to the morality of states -- Part two. The autonomy of states -- 1. State autonomy and individual liberty -- 2. Nonintervention, Paternalism, and Neutrality -- 3. Self-determination -- 4. Eligibility, boundaries, and nationality -- 5. Economic dependence -- 6. State autonomy and domestic social justice -- Part three. International distributive justice -- 1. Social cooperation, boundaries, and the basis of justice -- 2. Entitlements to natural resources -- 3. Interdependence and global distributive justice -- 4. Contrasts between international and domestic society -- 5. The rights of states -- 6. Applications to the Nonideal world -- Conclusion -- Afterword -- Works cited -- Index

"In this revised edition of his 1979 classic Political Theory and International Relations, Charles Beitz rejects two highly influential conceptions of international theory as empirically inaccurate and theoretically misleading. In one, international relations is a Hobbesian state of nature in which moral judgments are entirely inappropriate, and in the other, states are analogous to persons in domestic society in having rights of autonomy that insulate them from external moral assessment and political interference. Beitz postulates that a theory of international politics should include a revised principle of state autonomy based on the justice of a state's domestic institutions, and a principle of international distributive justice to establish a fair division of resources and wealth among persons situated in diverse national societies."--Jacket.

Cover Page -- Half-title Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication Page -- Contents -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- One: The Subject of Political Equality -- Part One: Theory -- Two: Results -- Three: Preferences -- Four: Procedures -- Five: A Theory of Political Fairness -- Part Two: Applications -- six: Proportional Representation -- Seven: Fair Representation and Legislative Districting -- Eight: The Formation of the Political Agenda -- Nine: Political Finance -- Conclusion -- Ten: Substance and Method -- Works Cited -- Index.

"The Moral Standing of States" is the title of an essay Michael Walzer wrote in response to four critics of the theory of nonintervention defended in Just and Unjust Wars. It states a theme to which he has returned in subsequent work. I offer four sets of comments. First, by way of introduction, I describe the controversy between Walzer and his critics and try to identify the central point of contention. Second, I make some observations about the wider conception of global justice suggested by Walzer's remarks, emphasizing the extent of the difference between this conception and the traditional view of a "society of states" to which it stands as an alternative. The central value in Walzer's conception is collective self-determination, so I comment about its meaning and importance. Finally, I consider whether and how concerns about the moral standing of states bear on the kinds of cases of humanitarian intervention that the world community has actually faced since the book and article were written, particularly since the end of the cold war.