Abstract
The very idea of republican human rights, seems paradoxical. My aim in this article is to explore this disjunctive conjunction. One of the distinctive features of republican discourse, both in its civic humanist and neo-Roman variants, is the secondary status that rights are supposed to play in politics. Although the language of rights is not incommensurable with republican political thought, it is supposed to know its place. What can republican categories of political understanding offer for grappling with the challenges of global politics? Many philosophical expressions of human rights today are Kantian or neo-Kantian in inspiration, and as a result they are plagued by the familiar difficulties raised by Kantian approaches to politics in general. In particular, the growing prominence of human rights discourse has led to withering attacks on the appeal to human rights without any effective means of enforcement. Does republicanism offer any resources for rethinking human rights, and in particular, addressing the concern with the often moralistic and depoliticizing nature of human rights talk today? What conception of human rights best promotes freedom as non-domination? Are our practices of human rights effective instruments for minimizing domination?
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science
Reference23 articles.
1. See e.g. David Miller ( 2000) Citizenship and National Identity. Cambridge: Polity Press. Simon Caney (2002) ‘Entitlements, Obligations and Distributive Justice: The Global Level’ , in Daniel Bell and Avner de-Shalit (eds) (Forms of Justice, pp. 287-314. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
2. Skinner (1997, in n. 8), pp. 18-21.
Cited by
18 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献