The article discusses the principle of consumer sovereignty (considering the satisfaction of consumers' private wants as the ultimate end of economy and most important criterion of economic welfare) which together with the principles of freedom of choice and Pareto optimality constitutes the core of liberal libertarian apology for market economy. As a matter of fact, there are no empirically observable market economies without state regulation of consumption. This regulation includes prohibition to consume some products (e.g., drugs) and services, the restrictions (e.g., alcohol) on and sponsorship for consumption of some other products (e.g., theatre performances). The article discusses whether and under what conditions state regulation of consumption is paternalist and when it is consistent with consumer sovereignty. The consumer welfare (defined by the satisfaction of private (self-regarding) wants) is considered as only a special aspect of total social welfare (including also the satisfaction of non-partial other-regarding (ethical) wants) which is theoretically inconsistent concept because of the unsolved aggregation problems disclosed by famous Arrow theorem. Because of the pluralism of ethical values, visions of good life and good society characteristic for (post)modern Western society, consumer sovereignty is considered as the only viable foundation of economic politics committed to values of tolerance and negative liberty.
The article discusses the principle of consumer sovereignty (considering the satisfaction of consumers' private wants as the ultimate end of economy and most important criterion of economic welfare) which together with the principles of freedom of choice and Pareto optimality constitutes the core of liberal libertarian apology for market economy. As a matter of fact, there are no empirically observable market economies without state regulation of consumption. This regulation includes prohibition to consume some products (e.g., drugs) and services, the restrictions (e.g., alcohol) on and sponsorship for consumption of some other products (e.g., theatre performances). The article discusses whether and under what conditions state regulation of consumption is paternalist and when it is consistent with consumer sovereignty. The consumer welfare (defined by the satisfaction of private (self-regarding) wants) is considered as only a special aspect of total social welfare (including also the satisfaction of non-partial other-regarding (ethical) wants) which is theoretically inconsistent concept because of the unsolved aggregation problems disclosed by famous Arrow theorem. Because of the pluralism of ethical values, visions of good life and good society characteristic for (post)modern Western society, consumer sovereignty is considered as the only viable foundation of economic politics committed to values of tolerance and negative liberty.
The article discusses the principle of consumer sovereignty (considering the satisfaction of consumers' private wants as the ultimate end of economy and most important criterion of economic welfare) which together with the principles of freedom of choice and Pareto optimality constitutes the core of liberal libertarian apology for market economy. As a matter of fact, there are no empirically observable market economies without state regulation of consumption. This regulation includes prohibition to consume some products (e.g., drugs) and services, the restrictions (e.g., alcohol) on and sponsorship for consumption of some other products (e.g., theatre performances). The article discusses whether and under what conditions state regulation of consumption is paternalist and when it is consistent with consumer sovereignty. The consumer welfare (defined by the satisfaction of private (self-regarding) wants) is considered as only a special aspect of total social welfare (including also the satisfaction of non-partial other-regarding (ethical) wants) which is theoretically inconsistent concept because of the unsolved aggregation problems disclosed by famous Arrow theorem. Because of the pluralism of ethical values, visions of good life and good society characteristic for (post)modern Western society, consumer sovereignty is considered as the only viable foundation of economic politics committed to values of tolerance and negative liberty.
The article discusses the principle of consumer sovereignty (considering the satisfaction of consumers' private wants as the ultimate end of economy and most important criterion of economic welfare) which together with the principles of freedom of choice and Pareto optimality constitutes the core of liberal libertarian apology for market economy. As a matter of fact, there are no empirically observable market economies without state regulation of consumption. This regulation includes prohibition to consume some products (e.g., drugs) and services, the restrictions (e.g., alcohol) on and sponsorship for consumption of some other products (e.g., theatre performances). The article discusses whether and under what conditions state regulation of consumption is paternalist and when it is consistent with consumer sovereignty. The consumer welfare (defined by the satisfaction of private (self-regarding) wants) is considered as only a special aspect of total social welfare (including also the satisfaction of non-partial other-regarding (ethical) wants) which is theoretically inconsistent concept because of the unsolved aggregation problems disclosed by famous Arrow theorem. Because of the pluralism of ethical values, visions of good life and good society characteristic for (post)modern Western society, consumer sovereignty is considered as the only viable foundation of economic politics committed to values of tolerance and negative liberty.
500 years ago both a doctrine and institution of sovereignty were created; both were changed frequently in order to meet contemporaneous political demands. After World War I a system of sovereign nation-states was formed, which has become extremely conservative and suspicious towards any change in the status quo. If history has taught us anything, it is to doubt any theory or ideology that claims to have knowledge of the end of sovereignty. Globalization processes have raised many challenges never before seen by nation states: the loss of control of both global and local economies; migration and technological advancement taking away the monopoly of information flows in and out the countries; global issues forcing states to introduce supranational organizations such as the EU and NATO. Anti-global movements arise within the frames of globalism, and therefore a paradox emerges: anti-global processes work in the global field. With this in mind we can say that they will not change the world's tendencies towards globalism, but they can change the sources of global flows and disassociate Western capitalism and Westernism from globalization. While nation-states remain an important political structure, attention should be drawn to discussions about decreasing control and increasing the economic information and human flows that fall outside of the purview of states. The doctrine of state sovereignty has never been so ideologically – as well as legally – weak, and the limits of sovereignty are becoming more and more visible in contemporary politics. Globalization processes have raised many challenges never before seen by nation states: the loss of control of both global and local economies; migration and technological advancement taking away the monopoly of information flows in and out the countries; global issues forcing states to introduce supranational organizations such as the EU and NATO. Anti-global movements arise within the frames of globalism, and therefore a paradox emerges: anti-global processes work in the global field. With this in mind we can say that they will not change the world's tendencies towards globalism, but they can change the sources of global flows and disassociate Western capitalism and Westernism from globalization. While nation-states remain an important political structure, attention should be drawn to discussions about decreasing control and increasing the economic information and human flows that fall outside of the purview of states. The doctrine of state sovereignty has never been so ideologically – as well as legally – weak, and the limits of sovereignty are becoming more and more visible in contemporary politics. This work contains history of sovereignty, history of the globalization processes, the limits of sovereignty of nation-states and challenges of the globalization. Work consists of 8 parts: English and Lithuanian summary, Preface, History of sovereignty, Survey of globalization and its processes, Limits of suvereignty, Conclusion, Literature
500 years ago both a doctrine and institution of sovereignty were created; both were changed frequently in order to meet contemporaneous political demands. After World War I a system of sovereign nation-states was formed, which has become extremely conservative and suspicious towards any change in the status quo. If history has taught us anything, it is to doubt any theory or ideology that claims to have knowledge of the end of sovereignty. Globalization processes have raised many challenges never before seen by nation states: the loss of control of both global and local economies; migration and technological advancement taking away the monopoly of information flows in and out the countries; global issues forcing states to introduce supranational organizations such as the EU and NATO. Anti-global movements arise within the frames of globalism, and therefore a paradox emerges: anti-global processes work in the global field. With this in mind we can say that they will not change the world's tendencies towards globalism, but they can change the sources of global flows and disassociate Western capitalism and Westernism from globalization. While nation-states remain an important political structure, attention should be drawn to discussions about decreasing control and increasing the economic information and human flows that fall outside of the purview of states. The doctrine of state sovereignty has never been so ideologically – as well as legally – weak, and the limits of sovereignty are becoming more and more visible in contemporary politics. Globalization processes have raised many challenges never before seen by nation states: the loss of control of both global and local economies; migration and technological advancement taking away the monopoly of information flows in and out the countries; global issues forcing states to introduce supranational organizations such as the EU and NATO. Anti-global movements arise within the frames of globalism, and therefore a paradox emerges: anti-global processes work in the global field. With this in mind we can say that they will not change the world's tendencies towards globalism, but they can change the sources of global flows and disassociate Western capitalism and Westernism from globalization. While nation-states remain an important political structure, attention should be drawn to discussions about decreasing control and increasing the economic information and human flows that fall outside of the purview of states. The doctrine of state sovereignty has never been so ideologically – as well as legally – weak, and the limits of sovereignty are becoming more and more visible in contemporary politics. This work contains history of sovereignty, history of the globalization processes, the limits of sovereignty of nation-states and challenges of the globalization. Work consists of 8 parts: English and Lithuanian summary, Preface, History of sovereignty, Survey of globalization and its processes, Limits of suvereignty, Conclusion, Literature
500 years ago both a doctrine and institution of sovereignty were created; both were changed frequently in order to meet contemporaneous political demands. After World War I a system of sovereign nation-states was formed, which has become extremely conservative and suspicious towards any change in the status quo. If history has taught us anything, it is to doubt any theory or ideology that claims to have knowledge of the end of sovereignty. Globalization processes have raised many challenges never before seen by nation states: the loss of control of both global and local economies; migration and technological advancement taking away the monopoly of information flows in and out the countries; global issues forcing states to introduce supranational organizations such as the EU and NATO. Anti-global movements arise within the frames of globalism, and therefore a paradox emerges: anti-global processes work in the global field. With this in mind we can say that they will not change the world's tendencies towards globalism, but they can change the sources of global flows and disassociate Western capitalism and Westernism from globalization. While nation-states remain an important political structure, attention should be drawn to discussions about decreasing control and increasing the economic information and human flows that fall outside of the purview of states. The doctrine of state sovereignty has never been so ideologically – as well as legally – weak, and the limits of sovereignty are becoming more and more visible in contemporary politics. Globalization processes have raised many challenges never before seen by nation states: the loss of control of both global and local economies; migration and technological advancement taking away the monopoly of information flows in and out the countries; global issues forcing states to introduce supranational organizations such as the EU and NATO. Anti-global movements arise within the frames of globalism, and therefore a paradox emerges: anti-global processes work in the global field. With this in mind we can say that they will not change the world's tendencies towards globalism, but they can change the sources of global flows and disassociate Western capitalism and Westernism from globalization. While nation-states remain an important political structure, attention should be drawn to discussions about decreasing control and increasing the economic information and human flows that fall outside of the purview of states. The doctrine of state sovereignty has never been so ideologically – as well as legally – weak, and the limits of sovereignty are becoming more and more visible in contemporary politics. This work contains history of sovereignty, history of the globalization processes, the limits of sovereignty of nation-states and challenges of the globalization. Work consists of 8 parts: English and Lithuanian summary, Preface, History of sovereignty, Survey of globalization and its processes, Limits of suvereignty, Conclusion, Literature
This study examines evolution of the content of the principle of sovereignty in relation to airspace and its consolidation in international law and the national legal systems of the state (on the example of the Republic of Belarus). The author in the work summarizes the scientific ideas about the essence of the principle, enshrined in the sources of international aviation law; identifies changes in legal understanding of the principle of sovereignty in the context of liberalization of the regulation of international flights; analyzes the legal status of sovereign airspace and the nature of new common aviation spaces created on its basis; considers aspects of implementation of the principle in national legislation (on the example of the Republic of Belarus); assesses the compliance of the air legislation of the Republic of Belarus with the obligations undertaken by the state to build a single airspace within the Eurasian Economic Union. The purpose of this work is to investigate the nature of the evolution in the legal understanding of the principle of complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace in the process of development of international aviation law. The object of the research is legal relation arising between the subjects of the international aviation law in the sovereign airspace in connection with the legal regulation of international flights. The subject of the research is complex of international and national law (by the example of the Republic of Belarus), in the norms of which the principle of complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace is realized. As a result of studying the topic, it was concluded that legal understanding of the principle of sovereignty, enshrined in the international aviation law, is undergoing significant changes on the background of global and regional development processes in international air navigation. There is a gradual development from the understanding of the principle as an instrument of absolute and unlimited freedom of states to control their air territory without putting into consideration other actors of the international aviation law. This tendency is growing and is primarily associated with integration of sovereign airspace of a certain states into common (single) regional airspaces and, as a result, with a change in the airspace regime and state's transfer of a part of its power to the supranational governing bodies of this common space. The principle of sovereignty in this context acts as a political and legal instrument that allows the state in integration associations to defend its sovereign rights to manage the state territory in a common space, as well as to choose its own pace of integration towards the "single sky" on the basis of balanced use of both liberal, and protective measures for regulating international flights in their skies. A comprehensive study of the problem allowed the author to clarify the definition of the concept of "the principle of sovereignty in relation to airspace"; to propose a new point of view on the periodization of the process of consolidation and implementation of the principle in the sources of international aviation law; to determine a group of public rights of the state arising in the conditions of the functioning of the new liberal aeropolitics; identify a number of factors that impede the state (by the example of the Republic of Belarus) to successfully implement integration processes in the field of building a single airspace, as well as propose recommendations for improving the Air Code of the Republic of Belarus. Methodological basis of the study is formed by general scientific methods of systemic and structural analysis, generalization, interpretation, as well as special scientific methods of historical-legal, comparative-legal, formal-legal analysis. Practical significance of the work lies in the ability to use specific provisions, facts and conclusions set out in the dissertation research in specialized courses and academic subjects of international legal orientation, and will also be an asset author's employment in aviation sector.
This study examines evolution of the content of the principle of sovereignty in relation to airspace and its consolidation in international law and the national legal systems of the state (on the example of the Republic of Belarus). The author in the work summarizes the scientific ideas about the essence of the principle, enshrined in the sources of international aviation law; identifies changes in legal understanding of the principle of sovereignty in the context of liberalization of the regulation of international flights; analyzes the legal status of sovereign airspace and the nature of new common aviation spaces created on its basis; considers aspects of implementation of the principle in national legislation (on the example of the Republic of Belarus); assesses the compliance of the air legislation of the Republic of Belarus with the obligations undertaken by the state to build a single airspace within the Eurasian Economic Union. The purpose of this work is to investigate the nature of the evolution in the legal understanding of the principle of complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace in the process of development of international aviation law. The object of the research is legal relation arising between the subjects of the international aviation law in the sovereign airspace in connection with the legal regulation of international flights. The subject of the research is complex of international and national law (by the example of the Republic of Belarus), in the norms of which the principle of complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace is realized. As a result of studying the topic, it was concluded that legal understanding of the principle of sovereignty, enshrined in the international aviation law, is undergoing significant changes on the background of global and regional development processes in international air navigation. There is a gradual development from the understanding of the principle as an instrument of absolute and unlimited freedom of states to control their air territory without putting into consideration other actors of the international aviation law. This tendency is growing and is primarily associated with integration of sovereign airspace of a certain states into common (single) regional airspaces and, as a result, with a change in the airspace regime and state's transfer of a part of its power to the supranational governing bodies of this common space. The principle of sovereignty in this context acts as a political and legal instrument that allows the state in integration associations to defend its sovereign rights to manage the state territory in a common space, as well as to choose its own pace of integration towards the "single sky" on the basis of balanced use of both liberal, and protective measures for regulating international flights in their skies. A comprehensive study of the problem allowed the author to clarify the definition of the concept of "the principle of sovereignty in relation to airspace"; to propose a new point of view on the periodization of the process of consolidation and implementation of the principle in the sources of international aviation law; to determine a group of public rights of the state arising in the conditions of the functioning of the new liberal aeropolitics; identify a number of factors that impede the state (by the example of the Republic of Belarus) to successfully implement integration processes in the field of building a single airspace, as well as propose recommendations for improving the Air Code of the Republic of Belarus. Methodological basis of the study is formed by general scientific methods of systemic and structural analysis, generalization, interpretation, as well as special scientific methods of historical-legal, comparative-legal, formal-legal analysis. Practical significance of the work lies in the ability to use specific provisions, facts and conclusions set out in the dissertation research in specialized courses and academic subjects of international legal orientation, and will also be an asset author's employment in aviation sector.
On the ground of M. Römer's work "Suvereignty" there is presented in the article the representative democratic conception and "stretched nation" as sovereignty's idea. The parlamentary democratic constitutional construction is analysed too. There is stated in the article that parlamentary democracy by realysing "stretched nation's" interests structure puts into three autonomic state powers: President's institution power, Parlament and parlamentary Government institutions power and courts institution's power. ; Straipsnyje, remiantis M. Römerio veikale Suverenitetas pateikta reprezentacinės demokratijos samprata ir tęstinės tautos kaip suvereno idėja, analizuojama parlamentinės demokratijos konstitucinė sandara. Straipsnyje teigiama, kad parlamentinė demokratija, įdiegdama tęstinės tautos interesų (konkurencinio, visuminio ir apsauginio) struktūrą, įgyvendina savarankiškas valstybinės parlamentinės vyriausybės, valstybės vadovo ir teismų funkcijas.
After regaining its independence in 1990, Lithuania has demonstrated the will to establish the universal human rights standards in the country as soon as possible. However, taking into account the country's policy in the later years of independence, it's not clear whose interests – state of individual – are more important and how these concepts coexist in the framework of Lithuanian human rights policy. The aim of the research is to examine wherever state sovereignty and human rights are (in)compatible with each other in the policy-making context of Lithuanian human rights policy. Aiming to achieve the above mentioned aim the Lithuanian human rights policy-making context, factors affecting this policy, national legal basis on human rights, fourteen programmes of the Government through the prism of human rights are analyzed. In conducting the research the following research methods were used: documents and legal acts analysis, semi-structured interview, as well as comparative analysis. Empirical research data indicates that Lithuanian human rights policy could be described as fragmented, lacking integrity and balanced attention to all human rights; strongly expressed social economical dimension the other key feature of this policy. In the context of such policy the relation between the human rights and state sovereignty is rather mixed. On the one hand, the external sovereignty is compatible with human rights and freedoms; they complement each other. Meanwhile the supremacy of state's interests over the individual rights in the context of internal policy gives the basis to claim that human rights are not compatible with internal state sovereignty and state sovereignty which reflects the interests of state is a higher value in the internal policy. The empirical data also indicates that human rights and internal state sovereignty are compatible with each other when the interests of state include the duty to protect the human rights.
After regaining its independence in 1990, Lithuania has demonstrated the will to establish the universal human rights standards in the country as soon as possible. However, taking into account the country's policy in the later years of independence, it's not clear whose interests – state of individual – are more important and how these concepts coexist in the framework of Lithuanian human rights policy. The aim of the research is to examine wherever state sovereignty and human rights are (in)compatible with each other in the policy-making context of Lithuanian human rights policy. Aiming to achieve the above mentioned aim the Lithuanian human rights policy-making context, factors affecting this policy, national legal basis on human rights, fourteen programmes of the Government through the prism of human rights are analyzed. In conducting the research the following research methods were used: documents and legal acts analysis, semi-structured interview, as well as comparative analysis. Empirical research data indicates that Lithuanian human rights policy could be described as fragmented, lacking integrity and balanced attention to all human rights; strongly expressed social economical dimension the other key feature of this policy. In the context of such policy the relation between the human rights and state sovereignty is rather mixed. On the one hand, the external sovereignty is compatible with human rights and freedoms; they complement each other. Meanwhile the supremacy of state's interests over the individual rights in the context of internal policy gives the basis to claim that human rights are not compatible with internal state sovereignty and state sovereignty which reflects the interests of state is a higher value in the internal policy. The empirical data also indicates that human rights and internal state sovereignty are compatible with each other when the interests of state include the duty to protect the human rights.
After regaining its independence in 1990, Lithuania has demonstrated the will to establish the universal human rights standards in the country as soon as possible. However, taking into account the country's policy in the later years of independence, it's not clear whose interests – state of individual – are more important and how these concepts coexist in the framework of Lithuanian human rights policy. The aim of the research is to examine wherever state sovereignty and human rights are (in)compatible with each other in the policy-making context of Lithuanian human rights policy. Aiming to achieve the above mentioned aim the Lithuanian human rights policy-making context, factors affecting this policy, national legal basis on human rights, fourteen programmes of the Government through the prism of human rights are analyzed. In conducting the research the following research methods were used: documents and legal acts analysis, semi-structured interview, as well as comparative analysis. Empirical research data indicates that Lithuanian human rights policy could be described as fragmented, lacking integrity and balanced attention to all human rights; strongly expressed social economical dimension the other key feature of this policy. In the context of such policy the relation between the human rights and state sovereignty is rather mixed. On the one hand, the external sovereignty is compatible with human rights and freedoms; they complement each other. Meanwhile the supremacy of state's interests over the individual rights in the context of internal policy gives the basis to claim that human rights are not compatible with internal state sovereignty and state sovereignty which reflects the interests of state is a higher value in the internal policy. The empirical data also indicates that human rights and internal state sovereignty are compatible with each other when the interests of state include the duty to protect the human rights.
After regaining its independence in 1990, Lithuania has demonstrated the will to establish the universal human rights standards in the country as soon as possible. However, taking into account the country's policy in the later years of independence, it's not clear whose interests – state of individual – are more important and how these concepts coexist in the framework of Lithuanian human rights policy. The aim of the research is to examine wherever state sovereignty and human rights are (in)compatible with each other in the policy-making context of Lithuanian human rights policy. Aiming to achieve the above mentioned aim the Lithuanian human rights policy-making context, factors affecting this policy, national legal basis on human rights, fourteen programmes of the Government through the prism of human rights are analyzed. In conducting the research the following research methods were used: documents and legal acts analysis, semi-structured interview, as well as comparative analysis. Empirical research data indicates that Lithuanian human rights policy could be described as fragmented, lacking integrity and balanced attention to all human rights; strongly expressed social economical dimension the other key feature of this policy. In the context of such policy the relation between the human rights and state sovereignty is rather mixed. On the one hand, the external sovereignty is compatible with human rights and freedoms; they complement each other. Meanwhile the supremacy of state's interests over the individual rights in the context of internal policy gives the basis to claim that human rights are not compatible with internal state sovereignty and state sovereignty which reflects the interests of state is a higher value in the internal policy. The empirical data also indicates that human rights and internal state sovereignty are compatible with each other when the interests of state include the duty to protect the human rights.
The article presents the theoretical framework that could be used in analyzing the opposition of state sovereignty and human rights in international relations. As the methodological tool is chosen the English School of international relations, which is known as a via media, a third way between realism and liberalism. The English School is generally divided into two major camps – pluralism and solidarism, distinguishable by their positions on the role of values in international society. The pluralistic variant of English School is closer to realism, and the solidarist variant – to liberalism. The main concept which represents the English School is the international society. According to the definition by H. Bull and A. Watson, international society is a "group of states (or, more generally, a group of independent political communities) which not merely form a system, in the sense that the behaviour of each is a necessary factor in the calculations of the others, but also have established by dialogue and consent common rules and institutions for the conduct of their relations, and recognise their common interest in maintaining these arrangements". Pluralists and solidarists perceive the concept of international society differently. The pluralist concept of international society refers to the positivist tradition of international law. According to that tradition, international law is the law between states only and exclusively. The statement that only sovereign states can become members of the international society is of fundamental importance in the pluralist approach. The scope of pluralist international society is fairly minimal, centered on shared concerns about international order under anarchy, and thus largely confined to agreement about sovereignty, diplomacy, and non-intervention.[.].