Search Results

This chapter charts the rise of the neo-liberal Conservatism approach to the welfare state under the Thatcher and Major governments. While emphasis was given to economic reforms during the first and second term Thatcher governments, there were clear indications of a neo-liberal turn in social policy. These included enabling council house tenants to buy their homes under the 1980 Housing Act, reforms to the social security system and the adoption of a more `business-like’ approach to running the NHS. In the third term social policy took centre stage with changes in health and social care. The Education Reform Act of 1980 led to the introduction of a national curriculum and national testing of pupil performance. Thatcher’s downfall led to Major taking the reins in 1992. After securing victory in the General Election, Major embedded Thatcher’s neo-liberal social reforms years, maintaining public funding whilst seeking cost savings and more `efficient’ non-state forms of delivery.

In this chapter, I will review what I see as the essential characteristics of the Obama foreign policy style and analyze whether we can discern a clear “Obama doctrine” from his foreign policy actions and rhetoric. In order to do so, I will lay out the four major approaches to American foreign policy-making and then assess how Obama’s policies fit within these approaches. Obama’s early foreign policy moves emphasized reconciliation and a more focused approach on counterterrorism as opposed to regime change. However, domestic political and international geopolitical constraints came to limit his ambitions. As the first Black president, Obama’s initial soaring rhetoric of change was replaced by cautionary tales of avoiding mistakes. After laying out the four schools of American foreign policy (nationalist, realist, liberal institutionalist, neoconservative), I discuss Obama’s policy style—the “nonideological doctrine”—that was purposively deliberative and cautious, in contrast to the ideological Bush regime-change crusade. Obama was careful to weigh the costs and benefits of policy options, keeping an eye on his predilection that foreign affairs must not interfere with the domestic agenda. This caution, which avoided major commitments to overseas conflicts, came under criticism from both the Left and Right of the political spectrum.

This chapter emphasizes the obstacles to enforcement that are created by the continuing dominance of the principle of majority rule, and more fundamentally, the limitations of a system of enforcement that is largely dependent on shareholder action. It is noted that the implementation of the Fifth Directive proposals or a liberal approach to sections 459–61 would considerably improve the ability of minority shareholders to enforce management duties. The underlying problem of the lack of an incentive to bring proceedings would however remain.

This chapter considers in greater detail how the historical critical method sheds light on the term “from” and whether the position can be considered to be in any way traditional. It talks about the doctrine that the Torah is from Heaven, emphasizing that every word of the Pentateuch, the Five Books of Moses, was communicated directly by God to Moses during the forty years the Children of Israel journeyed through the wilderness. This demonstrates that there are faint glimmerings in talmudic statements that enable non-fundamentalists to claim new theological formulations. The point of quoting talmudic and similar references from the past is to show how much more flexible the rabbis were in matters of dogma than whose stark formulation is often hurled against the legitimacy of the “liberal” approach. What is involved in any new formulation of dogma is a greater awareness of the real history of Judaism.

This chapter explores the extent of consensus and disagreement among alternative contemporary accounts of justice on the matter of the kinds of events that might warrant restitution and, consequently, the computation of the magnitude of restitution. The goal is not to adjudicate the relevant normative controversies, but rather to illustrate the significance of normative theory for the restitution project. For purposes of demonstration, the chapter focuses on three important traditions in the recent scholarship on economic justice: the libertarian tradition of political philosophy, the liberal contractarian approach, and the capabilities approach. This focus shows that normative controversy surrounding the concept of justice bears heavily on considerations pertaining to restitution.

Discrimination law is controversial because law’s characterization of acts as discriminatory diverges significantly from the layperson’s understanding of discrimination. Theories of discrimination law will do well to acknowledge this divergence. They should also consider that an inquiry into the general purpose of discrimination law could be different from one into the nature of the rights and duties it imposes in particular cases. This chapter outlines the broad contours of the freedom-based defence of discrimination law that is to follow in the book. The inquiry will be in three parts: the first part of the book will identify the scope and essential content of discrimination law, the second part will inquire into its purpose, and the final part will account for the different duties it imposes on certain classes of persons.