Jonathan Wolff and Avner De-Shalit
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- May 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199278268
- eISBN:
- 9780191707902
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199278268.003.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Beginning with the story of Leah — an Israeli woman who suffers from lack of control over her life — this introductory chapter raises the key questions discussed in the book and discusses differences ...
More
Beginning with the story of Leah — an Israeli woman who suffers from lack of control over her life — this introductory chapter raises the key questions discussed in the book and discusses differences and similarities between the moral demands of priority to the least advantage, sufficiency, and equality. It is argued that redistributive policies which do not adequately reach the very worst off are likely to have destructive effects on many aspects of society, and that in practice, there is a consensus among egalitarians to search for priority to the least advantaged. In addition, the chapter locates the arguments of the book within the debate as to whether egalitarianism should focus on matters of distribution alone, or whether issues of social structure (often referred to as social equality) should instead be its focus. The rest of the chapter summarizes the book's argument and discusses the method of research.Less
Beginning with the story of Leah — an Israeli woman who suffers from lack of control over her life — this introductory chapter raises the key questions discussed in the book and discusses differences and similarities between the moral demands of priority to the least advantage, sufficiency, and equality. It is argued that redistributive policies which do not adequately reach the very worst off are likely to have destructive effects on many aspects of society, and that in practice, there is a consensus among egalitarians to search for priority to the least advantaged. In addition, the chapter locates the arguments of the book within the debate as to whether egalitarianism should focus on matters of distribution alone, or whether issues of social structure (often referred to as social equality) should instead be its focus. The rest of the chapter summarizes the book's argument and discusses the method of research.
David Miller
- Published in print:
- 1995
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198280088
- eISBN:
- 9780191599927
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198280084.003.0010
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
David Miller explores and develops Michael Walzer's notion of complex equality as a way of bringing together the potentially conflicting ideas of distributive justice and social equality. He examines ...
More
David Miller explores and develops Michael Walzer's notion of complex equality as a way of bringing together the potentially conflicting ideas of distributive justice and social equality. He examines the empirical plausibility of the notion of complex equality and argues that Walzer's theory of the spheres of justice allows the construction of an understanding of distributive justice and social equality that is different from, and superior to, mainstream political philosophy.Less
David Miller explores and develops Michael Walzer's notion of complex equality as a way of bringing together the potentially conflicting ideas of distributive justice and social equality. He examines the empirical plausibility of the notion of complex equality and argues that Walzer's theory of the spheres of justice allows the construction of an understanding of distributive justice and social equality that is different from, and superior to, mainstream political philosophy.
Richard J. Arneson
- Published in print:
- 1995
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198280088
- eISBN:
- 9780191599927
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198280084.003.0011
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Richard Arneson argues that Michael Walzer's theory of complex equality is not sufficiently egalitarian, as it permits any degree of inequality. Arneson claims that David Miller's reinterpretation of ...
More
Richard Arneson argues that Michael Walzer's theory of complex equality is not sufficiently egalitarian, as it permits any degree of inequality. Arneson claims that David Miller's reinterpretation of the notion of complex equality as social equality does not succeed in replacing the ideal of distributive equality.Less
Richard Arneson argues that Michael Walzer's theory of complex equality is not sufficiently egalitarian, as it permits any degree of inequality. Arneson claims that David Miller's reinterpretation of the notion of complex equality as social equality does not succeed in replacing the ideal of distributive equality.
Wojciech Sadurski
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199545179
- eISBN:
- 9780191719905
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199545179.001.0001
- Subject:
- Law, Philosophy of Law
It is often claimed — correctly, in the opinion of the author of this book — that a legitimate government must treat all citizens not just with a measure of concern but with equal concern. This ...
More
It is often claimed — correctly, in the opinion of the author of this book — that a legitimate government must treat all citizens not just with a measure of concern but with equal concern. This contention links two major legal and philosophical concepts — legitimacy and equality — by making the former dependent on the latter. The book examines this connection in detail. It aims to explain the relationship between the idea of legitimacy of law in a democratic system and equality, in three dimensions: political, legal, and social. Exploring the constituent elements of the concept of legitimacy and the specific requirements of political, legal, and social equality, the book seeks to demonstrate how a conception of democratic legitimacy is necessary for understanding and reconciling equality and legitimacy.Less
It is often claimed — correctly, in the opinion of the author of this book — that a legitimate government must treat all citizens not just with a measure of concern but with equal concern. This contention links two major legal and philosophical concepts — legitimacy and equality — by making the former dependent on the latter. The book examines this connection in detail. It aims to explain the relationship between the idea of legitimacy of law in a democratic system and equality, in three dimensions: political, legal, and social. Exploring the constituent elements of the concept of legitimacy and the specific requirements of political, legal, and social equality, the book seeks to demonstrate how a conception of democratic legitimacy is necessary for understanding and reconciling equality and legitimacy.
Kok-Chor Tan
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199588855
- eISBN:
- 9780191738586
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199588855.003.0005
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Political Philosophy, Moral Philosophy
This chapter responds to some influential objections raised by proponents of democratic equality (e.g. Anderson, Scheffler, Freeman) against luck egalitarianism. I argue that these objections are ...
More
This chapter responds to some influential objections raised by proponents of democratic equality (e.g. Anderson, Scheffler, Freeman) against luck egalitarianism. I argue that these objections are deflected when the domain, site, and purpose of luck egalitarianism are understood in the way I have proposed. While various aspects of luck egalitarianism are no doubt in need of further refinement and development (as is the case with other competing conceptions of equality), the main conclusion of this chapter is that the standard worries that luck egalitarianism is so implausible as not even to get off the ground as a justification of equality are unfounded. Luck egalitarianism as an account of the grounds of equality is both attractive and plausible, and therefore deserving of continuing philosophical attention and defense.Less
This chapter responds to some influential objections raised by proponents of democratic equality (e.g. Anderson, Scheffler, Freeman) against luck egalitarianism. I argue that these objections are deflected when the domain, site, and purpose of luck egalitarianism are understood in the way I have proposed. While various aspects of luck egalitarianism are no doubt in need of further refinement and development (as is the case with other competing conceptions of equality), the main conclusion of this chapter is that the standard worries that luck egalitarianism is so implausible as not even to get off the ground as a justification of equality are unfounded. Luck egalitarianism as an account of the grounds of equality is both attractive and plausible, and therefore deserving of continuing philosophical attention and defense.
David Erdos
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199557769
- eISBN:
- 9780191594380
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557769.003.0006
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
This chapter considers the socio‐politics of bill of rights debates and outcomes in New Zealand. The first part of the chapter focuses on the unsuccessful proposals for a bill of rights in the late ...
More
This chapter considers the socio‐politics of bill of rights debates and outcomes in New Zealand. The first part of the chapter focuses on the unsuccessful proposals for a bill of rights in the late 1950s and early 1960s. This debate was triggered politically by a felt need to strengthen institutional checks following abolition of the upper house. However, the trigger was very weak and never pointed specifically to the need for a bill of rights. Meanwhile, strong social support for such an instrument was confined to the neo‐liberal Constitutional Society. Postmaterialist rights groups were ill‐developed and, in any case, largely adhered to traditional Westminster precepts. The second part examines the very different debate of the 1980s which led to the statutory New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (NZBOR). This was politically prompted by a more focused ‘aversive’ reaction against the perceived authoritarianism of Robert Muldoon's National administration. Meanwhile, postmaterialist rights groups were not only better developed by this stage but also more open to formalizing rights guarantees. Nevertheless, the relatively weak, backward‐looking nature of the political trigger combined with a continued societal belief in parliamentary sovereignty shaped and limited the nature of reform. Both parts of the chapter include detailed discussion of the particular role of the Māori including analysis of the failure to include special protections for indigenous rights with NZBOR.Less
This chapter considers the socio‐politics of bill of rights debates and outcomes in New Zealand. The first part of the chapter focuses on the unsuccessful proposals for a bill of rights in the late 1950s and early 1960s. This debate was triggered politically by a felt need to strengthen institutional checks following abolition of the upper house. However, the trigger was very weak and never pointed specifically to the need for a bill of rights. Meanwhile, strong social support for such an instrument was confined to the neo‐liberal Constitutional Society. Postmaterialist rights groups were ill‐developed and, in any case, largely adhered to traditional Westminster precepts. The second part examines the very different debate of the 1980s which led to the statutory New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (NZBOR). This was politically prompted by a more focused ‘aversive’ reaction against the perceived authoritarianism of Robert Muldoon's National administration. Meanwhile, postmaterialist rights groups were not only better developed by this stage but also more open to formalizing rights guarantees. Nevertheless, the relatively weak, backward‐looking nature of the political trigger combined with a continued societal belief in parliamentary sovereignty shaped and limited the nature of reform. Both parts of the chapter include detailed discussion of the particular role of the Māori including analysis of the failure to include special protections for indigenous rights with NZBOR.
David Erdos
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199557769
- eISBN:
- 9780191594380
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557769.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
This chapter examines the socio‐political genesis of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). The first part of the chapter examines the immediate political origins of this instrument. It ...
More
This chapter examines the socio‐political genesis of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). The first part of the chapter examines the immediate political origins of this instrument. It is found that, as an elite federal political project, the Charter was triggered by a felt need to create a new unifying institution to counter the centrifugal forces of Québécois nationalism. The powerful, largely self‐interested, and prospective nature of this ‘threat to political stability’ trigger encouraged elites to push for a fully constitutional instrument, something which was largely achieved. This trigger also led to a substantive focus on protecting rights integral to building up a pan‐Canadian identity including, most particularly, intra‐provincial anglophone and francophone linguistic rights. The second part of the chapter explores background social pressure for a constitutional bill of rights during this time. It is found that civil libertarians and social equality seekers, both given added political saliency by the continuing postmaterialization of the Canadian economy and society, were critical advocates of a constitutional bill of rights, helping the federal government defeat counter‐mobilization by recalcitrant provincial premiers. In turn, these groups critically structured many of the most important substantive aspects of the Charter. The chapter closes by considering the origins of the aboriginal rights protections and the absence of a right to private property within the Charter.Less
This chapter examines the socio‐political genesis of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). The first part of the chapter examines the immediate political origins of this instrument. It is found that, as an elite federal political project, the Charter was triggered by a felt need to create a new unifying institution to counter the centrifugal forces of Québécois nationalism. The powerful, largely self‐interested, and prospective nature of this ‘threat to political stability’ trigger encouraged elites to push for a fully constitutional instrument, something which was largely achieved. This trigger also led to a substantive focus on protecting rights integral to building up a pan‐Canadian identity including, most particularly, intra‐provincial anglophone and francophone linguistic rights. The second part of the chapter explores background social pressure for a constitutional bill of rights during this time. It is found that civil libertarians and social equality seekers, both given added political saliency by the continuing postmaterialization of the Canadian economy and society, were critical advocates of a constitutional bill of rights, helping the federal government defeat counter‐mobilization by recalcitrant provincial premiers. In turn, these groups critically structured many of the most important substantive aspects of the Charter. The chapter closes by considering the origins of the aboriginal rights protections and the absence of a right to private property within the Charter.
Jane Dailey
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780195382419
- eISBN:
- 9780199932641
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195382419.003.0008
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
The war rent asunder the New Deal alliance between white and black reformers. Central to the split was the wartime prominence of a perennial white panic—interracial sex. Reformers had ducked the ...
More
The war rent asunder the New Deal alliance between white and black reformers. Central to the split was the wartime prominence of a perennial white panic—interracial sex. Reformers had ducked the “social equality” issue during the New Deal, but the advent of war brought the issue front and center. The Nazis’ attempts to create racial purity undermined the case against intermarriage at home, while winning the right to fight made a strong case for African Americans to win the full rights of citizenship—including freedom to marry. Meanwhile wartime contact between black men and white women at United Service Organization canteens and outside southern army bases ratcheted up sexual tensions. As black leaders and white segregationists found themselves broaching the once taboo topic of “social equality” from opposite directions, white reformers found their position untenable. The war meant gradual reform in the South would not be feasible.Less
The war rent asunder the New Deal alliance between white and black reformers. Central to the split was the wartime prominence of a perennial white panic—interracial sex. Reformers had ducked the “social equality” issue during the New Deal, but the advent of war brought the issue front and center. The Nazis’ attempts to create racial purity undermined the case against intermarriage at home, while winning the right to fight made a strong case for African Americans to win the full rights of citizenship—including freedom to marry. Meanwhile wartime contact between black men and white women at United Service Organization canteens and outside southern army bases ratcheted up sexual tensions. As black leaders and white segregationists found themselves broaching the once taboo topic of “social equality” from opposite directions, white reformers found their position untenable. The war meant gradual reform in the South would not be feasible.
Christopher McCrudden
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199232420
- eISBN:
- 9780191716058
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232420.001.0001
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law, EU Law
Governments spend huge amounts of money buying goods and services from the private sector. How far should their spending power be affected by social policy? Arguments against the practice are often ...
More
Governments spend huge amounts of money buying goods and services from the private sector. How far should their spending power be affected by social policy? Arguments against the practice are often made by economists — on the grounds of inefficiency, and lawyers — on the grounds of free competition and international economic law. Buying Social Justice analyses how governments in developed and developing countries use their contracting power in order to advance social equality and reduce discrimination, and argues that this approach is an entirely legitimate and efficient means of achieving social justice. The book looks at the different experiences of a range of countries, including the UK, the USA, and South Africa. It also examines the impact of international and regional regulation of the international economy, and questions the extent to which the issue of procurement policy should be regulated at the national, European or international levels. The role of EC and WTO law in mediating the tensions between the economic function of procurement and the social uses of procurement is discussed, and the outcomes of controversies concerning the legitimacy of the integration of social values into procurement are analysed. Buying Social Justice argues that European and international legal regulation of procurement has become an important means of accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative in both the social and economic uses of procurement.Less
Governments spend huge amounts of money buying goods and services from the private sector. How far should their spending power be affected by social policy? Arguments against the practice are often made by economists — on the grounds of inefficiency, and lawyers — on the grounds of free competition and international economic law. Buying Social Justice analyses how governments in developed and developing countries use their contracting power in order to advance social equality and reduce discrimination, and argues that this approach is an entirely legitimate and efficient means of achieving social justice. The book looks at the different experiences of a range of countries, including the UK, the USA, and South Africa. It also examines the impact of international and regional regulation of the international economy, and questions the extent to which the issue of procurement policy should be regulated at the national, European or international levels. The role of EC and WTO law in mediating the tensions between the economic function of procurement and the social uses of procurement is discussed, and the outcomes of controversies concerning the legitimacy of the integration of social values into procurement are analysed. Buying Social Justice argues that European and international legal regulation of procurement has become an important means of accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative in both the social and economic uses of procurement.
David Erdos
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199557769
- eISBN:
- 9780191594380
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557769.003.0004
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
This chapter forwards a new socio‐political explanation for the genesis of the Canadian Bill of Rights Act (CBORA) (1960). Following a brief chronological overview, the first part of the chapter ...
More
This chapter forwards a new socio‐political explanation for the genesis of the Canadian Bill of Rights Act (CBORA) (1960). Following a brief chronological overview, the first part of the chapter explores the origins of increased social support for a bill of rights in Canada from the mid‐1930s onwards. It argues that demands for such an instrument arose out of the civil libertarian and social equality communities and that these communities were given added political saliency by the gradual postmaterialization of the Canadian economy and society. Nevertheless, this factor alone, cannot explain the precocious development of such pressures in Canada vis‐à‐vis other Westminster democracies. Explanations of this which focus either on international human rights developments or on the federal features of the Canadian political system are rejected. By contrast, it is found that Canada's particularly close cultural and people‐to‐people linkages with the bill of rights‐infused United States did prove important. The final part of the chapter explores the immediate political origins of CBORA. It is found that this was fuelled by the ‘aversive’ response of key Progressive Conservatives to the perceived abuses of procedural rights and other guarantees under the previous Liberal Government. Combined with the social forces already mentioned, the nature and strength of this trigger strongly influenced both the substantive content and statutory structure of CBORA.Less
This chapter forwards a new socio‐political explanation for the genesis of the Canadian Bill of Rights Act (CBORA) (1960). Following a brief chronological overview, the first part of the chapter explores the origins of increased social support for a bill of rights in Canada from the mid‐1930s onwards. It argues that demands for such an instrument arose out of the civil libertarian and social equality communities and that these communities were given added political saliency by the gradual postmaterialization of the Canadian economy and society. Nevertheless, this factor alone, cannot explain the precocious development of such pressures in Canada vis‐à‐vis other Westminster democracies. Explanations of this which focus either on international human rights developments or on the federal features of the Canadian political system are rejected. By contrast, it is found that Canada's particularly close cultural and people‐to‐people linkages with the bill of rights‐infused United States did prove important. The final part of the chapter explores the immediate political origins of CBORA. It is found that this was fuelled by the ‘aversive’ response of key Progressive Conservatives to the perceived abuses of procedural rights and other guarantees under the previous Liberal Government. Combined with the social forces already mentioned, the nature and strength of this trigger strongly influenced both the substantive content and statutory structure of CBORA.
Andrew Mason
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199606245
- eISBN:
- 9780191741562
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199606245.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
Traditional understandings of citizenship are facing a number of challenges. Ideas of cosmopolitan and environmental citizenship have emerged in the light of concerns about global inequality and ...
More
Traditional understandings of citizenship are facing a number of challenges. Ideas of cosmopolitan and environmental citizenship have emerged in the light of concerns about global inequality and climate change, whilst new models of multicultural citizenship have been developed in response to the dilemmas posed by immigration and the presence of national minorities. At the same time, more particular debates take place about the demands citizenship places upon us in our everyday lives. Do we have a duty as citizens to take steps to reduce the risk of needing to rely upon state benefits, including health care? Does good citizenship require that we send our children to the local school even when it performs poorly? Does a parent fail in his duty as a citizen — not just as a father, say — when he is less involved in the raising of his children than their mother? Should citizens refrain from appealing to religious reasons in public debate? Do immigrants have a duty to integrate? Do we have duties of citizenship to minimize the size of our ecological footprints? This book develops a normative theory of citizenship that brings together issues such as these under a common framework rather than treating them in isolation in the way that often happens. It distinguishes two different ways of thinking about citizenship both of which shed some light on the demands that it makes upon us: according to the first approach, the demands of citizenship are grounded exclusively in considerations of justice, whereas according to the second, they are grounded in the good that is realized by a political community the members of which have equal standing and treat each other as equals not only in the political process but in civil society and beyond.Less
Traditional understandings of citizenship are facing a number of challenges. Ideas of cosmopolitan and environmental citizenship have emerged in the light of concerns about global inequality and climate change, whilst new models of multicultural citizenship have been developed in response to the dilemmas posed by immigration and the presence of national minorities. At the same time, more particular debates take place about the demands citizenship places upon us in our everyday lives. Do we have a duty as citizens to take steps to reduce the risk of needing to rely upon state benefits, including health care? Does good citizenship require that we send our children to the local school even when it performs poorly? Does a parent fail in his duty as a citizen — not just as a father, say — when he is less involved in the raising of his children than their mother? Should citizens refrain from appealing to religious reasons in public debate? Do immigrants have a duty to integrate? Do we have duties of citizenship to minimize the size of our ecological footprints? This book develops a normative theory of citizenship that brings together issues such as these under a common framework rather than treating them in isolation in the way that often happens. It distinguishes two different ways of thinking about citizenship both of which shed some light on the demands that it makes upon us: according to the first approach, the demands of citizenship are grounded exclusively in considerations of justice, whereas according to the second, they are grounded in the good that is realized by a political community the members of which have equal standing and treat each other as equals not only in the political process but in civil society and beyond.
David Erdos
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- September 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199557769
- eISBN:
- 9780191594380
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199557769.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
The first part of this chapter explores in detail the Postmaterialist Trigger Thesis (PTT) explanation of bill of rights genesis in internally stable, advanced democracies. It argues that, as a ...
More
The first part of this chapter explores in detail the Postmaterialist Trigger Thesis (PTT) explanation of bill of rights genesis in internally stable, advanced democracies. It argues that, as a result of postmaterialist socio‐economic change, background pressure for a bill of rights has increased. Nevertheless, by enhancing judicial power, the bill of rights genesis continues to conflict with the prima facie positional interests of the political elite. Therefore, the supply of a bill of rights also requires a contingent political trigger which provides actors with an immediate rationale for change. Two such triggers – the ‘aversive’ and the ‘threat to political stability’ – are outlined. The second part of the chapter explores existing theories in the literature which relate to, but may also conflict with, the PTT. Specific theories discussed include, in relation to the background pressure aspect of the PTT, constructivist theory, institutionalist theory, transnational diffusion theory, and the Knowledge Class Thesis, and, in relation to the contingent trigger or supply‐side aspects, neo‐marxist theory, Political Insurance Thesis, and the Hegemonic Preservation Thesis.Less
The first part of this chapter explores in detail the Postmaterialist Trigger Thesis (PTT) explanation of bill of rights genesis in internally stable, advanced democracies. It argues that, as a result of postmaterialist socio‐economic change, background pressure for a bill of rights has increased. Nevertheless, by enhancing judicial power, the bill of rights genesis continues to conflict with the prima facie positional interests of the political elite. Therefore, the supply of a bill of rights also requires a contingent political trigger which provides actors with an immediate rationale for change. Two such triggers – the ‘aversive’ and the ‘threat to political stability’ – are outlined. The second part of the chapter explores existing theories in the literature which relate to, but may also conflict with, the PTT. Specific theories discussed include, in relation to the background pressure aspect of the PTT, constructivist theory, institutionalist theory, transnational diffusion theory, and the Knowledge Class Thesis, and, in relation to the contingent trigger or supply‐side aspects, neo‐marxist theory, Political Insurance Thesis, and the Hegemonic Preservation Thesis.
Ishani Maitra and Mary Kate McGowan (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199236282
- eISBN:
- 9780191741357
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199236282.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Feminist Philosophy, Philosophy of Language
Most liberal societies are deeply committed to a principle of free speech. At the same time, however, there is evidence that some kinds of speech are harmful in ways that are detrimental to important ...
More
Most liberal societies are deeply committed to a principle of free speech. At the same time, however, there is evidence that some kinds of speech are harmful in ways that are detrimental to important liberal values, such as social equality. Might a genuine commitment to free speech require that we legally permit speech even when it is harmful, and even when doing so is in conflict with our commitment to values like equality? Even if such speech is to be legally permitted, does our commitment to free speech allow us to provide material and institutional support to those who would contest such harmful speech? And finally, and perhaps most importantly, which kinds of speech are harmful in ways that merit response, either in the form of legal regulation or in some other form? This book explores these and related questions. Drawing on expertise in philosophy, sociology, political science, feminist theory, and legal theory, the chapters in this book investigate these themes and questions. By exploring various categories of speech (including pornography, hate speech, Holocaust denial literature, ‘Whites Only’ signs), and attending to the precise functioning of speech, the chapters shed light on these questions by clarifying the relationship between speech and harm. Understanding how speech functions can help us work out which kinds of speech are harmful, what those harms are, and how the speech in question brings them about. All of these issues are crucially important when it comes to deciding what ought to be done about allegedly harmful speech.Less
Most liberal societies are deeply committed to a principle of free speech. At the same time, however, there is evidence that some kinds of speech are harmful in ways that are detrimental to important liberal values, such as social equality. Might a genuine commitment to free speech require that we legally permit speech even when it is harmful, and even when doing so is in conflict with our commitment to values like equality? Even if such speech is to be legally permitted, does our commitment to free speech allow us to provide material and institutional support to those who would contest such harmful speech? And finally, and perhaps most importantly, which kinds of speech are harmful in ways that merit response, either in the form of legal regulation or in some other form? This book explores these and related questions. Drawing on expertise in philosophy, sociology, political science, feminist theory, and legal theory, the chapters in this book investigate these themes and questions. By exploring various categories of speech (including pornography, hate speech, Holocaust denial literature, ‘Whites Only’ signs), and attending to the precise functioning of speech, the chapters shed light on these questions by clarifying the relationship between speech and harm. Understanding how speech functions can help us work out which kinds of speech are harmful, what those harms are, and how the speech in question brings them about. All of these issues are crucially important when it comes to deciding what ought to be done about allegedly harmful speech.
Carina Fourie, Fabian Schuppert, and Ivo Wallimann-Helmer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- December 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199331109
- eISBN:
- 9780190212865
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199331109.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy
This volume presents new analyses of social and relational equality in philosophy and political theory. The chapters analyze the nature of social equality and its relationship with justice and with ...
More
This volume presents new analyses of social and relational equality in philosophy and political theory. The chapters analyze the nature of social equality and its relationship with justice and with politics. Is equality valuable? This question dominates many discussions of social justice. These discussions tend to center on whether certain forms of distributive equality are valuable, such as the equal distribution of primary social goods. They tend to neglect what is known as social or relational equality. Social egalitarians often argue that this form of equality is a more fundamental notion of equality than distributive equality. Rather than being primarily about distribution, equality, they claim, is foremost about relationships and interactions between people. When an appeal is made to the value of equality, primarily this means the value of egalitarian and nonhierarchical relationships, and not of distributions. The ideal of social equality features heavily in the history of the development of equality as an important part of political theory, and a number of contemporary philosophers have written about the significance of this form of equality. It has also played an important role in real-life egalitarian movements. However, as it has been relatively neglected—it requires much more theoretical attention. This book is an attempt to help to redress this neglect by providing in-depth analyses on the nature and distinctiveness of socially egalitarian relationships.Less
This volume presents new analyses of social and relational equality in philosophy and political theory. The chapters analyze the nature of social equality and its relationship with justice and with politics. Is equality valuable? This question dominates many discussions of social justice. These discussions tend to center on whether certain forms of distributive equality are valuable, such as the equal distribution of primary social goods. They tend to neglect what is known as social or relational equality. Social egalitarians often argue that this form of equality is a more fundamental notion of equality than distributive equality. Rather than being primarily about distribution, equality, they claim, is foremost about relationships and interactions between people. When an appeal is made to the value of equality, primarily this means the value of egalitarian and nonhierarchical relationships, and not of distributions. The ideal of social equality features heavily in the history of the development of equality as an important part of political theory, and a number of contemporary philosophers have written about the significance of this form of equality. It has also played an important role in real-life egalitarian movements. However, as it has been relatively neglected—it requires much more theoretical attention. This book is an attempt to help to redress this neglect by providing in-depth analyses on the nature and distinctiveness of socially egalitarian relationships.
Carol A. Horton
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195143485
- eISBN:
- 9780199850402
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195143485.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
This chapter examines the highly influential position of Darwinian liberalism, which argued in favor of a minimalist conception of black citizenship rights. This position, however, was coupled with ...
More
This chapter examines the highly influential position of Darwinian liberalism, which argued in favor of a minimalist conception of black citizenship rights. This position, however, was coupled with an insistence that equal rights could not and should not be expected to produce “social equality” between the races. In the context of a free-market order, Darwinian liberals claimed, the innate superiority of the white race ensured that it would forever dominate the black. The fact that this insistence on racial hierarchy was linked to a commitment to a minimal standard of black rights made it a politically moderate position in the context of the 1870s. By the turn of the century, however, this commitment had largely eroded, as Darwinian liberals forged an even more exclusive conception of white supremacy in reaction to the labor and agrarian movements of the 1880s–90s. In the context of late 19th-century America, providing the most minimal rights to African Americans remained controversial, even when accompanied by assurances of eternal white domination and racial hierarchy.Less
This chapter examines the highly influential position of Darwinian liberalism, which argued in favor of a minimalist conception of black citizenship rights. This position, however, was coupled with an insistence that equal rights could not and should not be expected to produce “social equality” between the races. In the context of a free-market order, Darwinian liberals claimed, the innate superiority of the white race ensured that it would forever dominate the black. The fact that this insistence on racial hierarchy was linked to a commitment to a minimal standard of black rights made it a politically moderate position in the context of the 1870s. By the turn of the century, however, this commitment had largely eroded, as Darwinian liberals forged an even more exclusive conception of white supremacy in reaction to the labor and agrarian movements of the 1880s–90s. In the context of late 19th-century America, providing the most minimal rights to African Americans remained controversial, even when accompanied by assurances of eternal white domination and racial hierarchy.
Rajeev Bhargava
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780198077473
- eISBN:
- 9780199081745
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198077473.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
Numerous studies have explored the nature of the faith and religion of the Hindus, the political construction of Hinduism and Hindu nationalism, and the impact of colonial modernity on Hindu faith ...
More
Numerous studies have explored the nature of the faith and religion of the Hindus, the political construction of Hinduism and Hindu nationalism, and the impact of colonial modernity on Hindu faith and practice. However, virtually no one has addressed the question raised by Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy in America: What is the impact of democracy on Christianity? This chapter discusses how democracy has shaped Hinduism, how Hinduism adapts to the democratic age and becomes a vehicle of social democratization, and what happens to Hinduism in an age that is constantly striving for equality of condition. More specifically, it examines what happens to Hinduism under conditions of what can be called social democratization (social equality, egoistic individualism, and a robust propensity for materialism). The chapter also discusses scripture and ritual in Hinduism, unity and plurality within Hinduism, and the impact of democratization of religion on women.Less
Numerous studies have explored the nature of the faith and religion of the Hindus, the political construction of Hinduism and Hindu nationalism, and the impact of colonial modernity on Hindu faith and practice. However, virtually no one has addressed the question raised by Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy in America: What is the impact of democracy on Christianity? This chapter discusses how democracy has shaped Hinduism, how Hinduism adapts to the democratic age and becomes a vehicle of social democratization, and what happens to Hinduism in an age that is constantly striving for equality of condition. More specifically, it examines what happens to Hinduism under conditions of what can be called social democratization (social equality, egoistic individualism, and a robust propensity for materialism). The chapter also discusses scripture and ritual in Hinduism, unity and plurality within Hinduism, and the impact of democratization of religion on women.
Julia Watkins, Therese Jennissen, and Colleen Lundy
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780195333619
- eISBN:
- 9780199918195
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333619.003.0061
- Subject:
- Social Work, Communities and Organizations
This chapter presents an overview of social work in Canada and the United States. Social work in both countries emerged at the turn of the 20th century as a response to the serious health and social ...
More
This chapter presents an overview of social work in Canada and the United States. Social work in both countries emerged at the turn of the 20th century as a response to the serious health and social problems that accompanied industrial expansion and the rise in immigration. The close relationship between Canadian and American social workers has endured through the centuries; however, there were differences in their development that were rooted in indigenous social issues. Canada has a strong French tradition, its relationship with its Aboriginal populations has developed in a particular way, and the existence of large rural and northern populations has presented unique issues for social workers. Differences aside, social workers in Canada and the United States are facing similar challenges, namely sustaining a social welfare state and advancing equality in the context of neoliberalism.Less
This chapter presents an overview of social work in Canada and the United States. Social work in both countries emerged at the turn of the 20th century as a response to the serious health and social problems that accompanied industrial expansion and the rise in immigration. The close relationship between Canadian and American social workers has endured through the centuries; however, there were differences in their development that were rooted in indigenous social issues. Canada has a strong French tradition, its relationship with its Aboriginal populations has developed in a particular way, and the existence of large rural and northern populations has presented unique issues for social workers. Differences aside, social workers in Canada and the United States are facing similar challenges, namely sustaining a social welfare state and advancing equality in the context of neoliberalism.
Michael Keating and David McCrone (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780748665822
- eISBN:
- 9780748693863
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748665822.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, European Union
This book tackles a puzzle. Given the failings of neo-liberalism revealed by the economic crisis starting in 2008, why was social democracy not triumphant? After all, its political success over much ...
More
This book tackles a puzzle. Given the failings of neo-liberalism revealed by the economic crisis starting in 2008, why was social democracy not triumphant? After all, its political success over much of the post-war period was bolstered by a particular representation of the inter-war years and a belief that governments had put the old economics behind them, while some social democrats had given early warnings about the follies being committed from the 1990s. Despite the caricature about social democratic governments being free spenders, they have tended in office to be rather fiscally responsible. Nor was there reason to believe that electors had rejected social democratic ideas about public services. Social democracy is in good health in some places, while elsewhere it is struggling to find its voice. One problem lies in the realm of ideas, where neo-liberalism has gained the ideological hegemony, to the extent that social democratic parties internalise it and seek to modify it only at the margins. Another is the inability to adapt to a more complex but still socially stratified and unequal society. A third lies in the decline of mass party politics and of the social institutions such as trade unions, which provided the means for social democrats to mobilise. The contributors do not present a single vision of social democracy but have been encouraged to interpret it in their own ways. The result is a complex picture, highlighting problems but showing that social democratic thought and practice are by no means dead.Less
This book tackles a puzzle. Given the failings of neo-liberalism revealed by the economic crisis starting in 2008, why was social democracy not triumphant? After all, its political success over much of the post-war period was bolstered by a particular representation of the inter-war years and a belief that governments had put the old economics behind them, while some social democrats had given early warnings about the follies being committed from the 1990s. Despite the caricature about social democratic governments being free spenders, they have tended in office to be rather fiscally responsible. Nor was there reason to believe that electors had rejected social democratic ideas about public services. Social democracy is in good health in some places, while elsewhere it is struggling to find its voice. One problem lies in the realm of ideas, where neo-liberalism has gained the ideological hegemony, to the extent that social democratic parties internalise it and seek to modify it only at the margins. Another is the inability to adapt to a more complex but still socially stratified and unequal society. A third lies in the decline of mass party politics and of the social institutions such as trade unions, which provided the means for social democrats to mobilise. The contributors do not present a single vision of social democracy but have been encouraged to interpret it in their own ways. The result is a complex picture, highlighting problems but showing that social democratic thought and practice are by no means dead.
Carina Fourie, Fabian Schuppert, and Ivo Wallimann-Helmer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- December 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199331109
- eISBN:
- 9780190212865
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199331109.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy
This chapter serves as an introduction to the collected volume. The first section aims to provide background on important themes in social egalitarianism and to set the context for understanding ...
More
This chapter serves as an introduction to the collected volume. The first section aims to provide background on important themes in social egalitarianism and to set the context for understanding which significant questions the chapters in this book pose and attempt to answer. This section focuses especially on what could be said to characterize socially egalitarian relationships, on which relationships are of concern, and on what might make social egalitarianism distinct. The second section provides a brief explanation of the structure of the book and each of its chapters.Less
This chapter serves as an introduction to the collected volume. The first section aims to provide background on important themes in social egalitarianism and to set the context for understanding which significant questions the chapters in this book pose and attempt to answer. This section focuses especially on what could be said to characterize socially egalitarian relationships, on which relationships are of concern, and on what might make social egalitarianism distinct. The second section provides a brief explanation of the structure of the book and each of its chapters.
Niraja Gopal Jayal
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780198077473
- eISBN:
- 9780199081745
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198077473.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, Comparative Politics
This chapter examines India’s experience with democratic citizenship by referring to two interrelated aspects of Alexis de Tocqueville’s argument in Democracy in America. The first argument is about ...
More
This chapter examines India’s experience with democratic citizenship by referring to two interrelated aspects of Alexis de Tocqueville’s argument in Democracy in America. The first argument is about the relationship between social equality and democracy, and the second is about civil society or the associational sphere for the performance of citizenship. However, neither the equality-democracy thesis nor the theory of citizenship was invoked by Tocqueville in his narrative of the ‘two unlucky races’ or indeed of women. This chapter looks at the Indian constitutional discourse and state policies on comparably disadvantaged groups, including women. Dana Villa has argued that the central distinction for Tocqueville was not between société politique and société civile, but between centralized and local and organizations of power with their implications for politics and participation in public life. This chapter situates the argument about differentiated citizenship in the local.Less
This chapter examines India’s experience with democratic citizenship by referring to two interrelated aspects of Alexis de Tocqueville’s argument in Democracy in America. The first argument is about the relationship between social equality and democracy, and the second is about civil society or the associational sphere for the performance of citizenship. However, neither the equality-democracy thesis nor the theory of citizenship was invoked by Tocqueville in his narrative of the ‘two unlucky races’ or indeed of women. This chapter looks at the Indian constitutional discourse and state policies on comparably disadvantaged groups, including women. Dana Villa has argued that the central distinction for Tocqueville was not between société politique and société civile, but between centralized and local and organizations of power with their implications for politics and participation in public life. This chapter situates the argument about differentiated citizenship in the local.
