Suchergebnisse

The Practice of Language Rights in Canada is a unique contribution to the current literature not only because it conceives of language rights as a human right but also because it frames the whole debate about language rights in Canada as a question of values and entitlements

AbstractIn a recent article in this Journal, Paul Sniderman, Joseph Fletcher, Peter Russell and Philip Tetlock characterize the patterns of support for language rights among anglophones and francophones as reflecting the practice of a "double standard," whereby each group recognizes these rights more readily for themselves than for the other official language group. The authors conclude that two factors, strategic calculation of interests and core political values, are central to understanding support for language rights. This comment focusses on two of their key concepts, "language rights" and "strategic calculation." It suggests that their discussion of language rights is rather narrowly limited to those recognized in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, thereby neglecting more controversial claims to language rights. Furthermore, "strategic calculation" is open to at least two mutually contradictory deductions regarding the anticipated patterns of support, both of which can be supported by their evidence. I conclude that the authors have presented an intuitively plausible hypothesis to explain support for language rights in Canada, but have not explored their key concepts in sufficient detail to sustain their case.

AbstractIn the past century, the notion of human rights has expanded significantly to include a variety of social rights. The introduction of this new category of human rights inspired a lively debate concerning the authenticity of such claims, focussing particularly on the ways in which social rights differ from political rights. This article examines the major points at issue in the debate. The important differences emphasized to date are those relating to costs, universality, and the correlativity of rights and duties. In each of these major areas of dispute, analysis indicates that the allegedly fundamental distinctions between social and political rights are in fact differences of degree, not of kind and, in fact, social rights conform both to the broad logic and the established practice of human rights.

Social and economic, or welfare rights, as an expansion of human rights. Differences between social and political rights relating to costs, universality, and the correlativity of rights and duties.