Showing papers in "Journal of International Political Theory in 2014"
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors respond to calls for a feminist theory/peace studies collaboration by integrating work on feminist care ethics and care ethics in the context of women's health care.
Abstract: How is it possible to create more just forms of peace in our world? This article responds to calls for a feminist theory/peace studies collaboration by integrating work on feminist care ethics and ...
28 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explain the meaning of consequentialism and explain how consequentialists understand and justify rights, including the right of national defense, and examine some issues that this right leaves unsettled and probe its moral limits.
Abstract: What, if anything, grounds the right of national defense? This essay explicates and defends a consequentialist answer to that question. After explaining the relevance and importance of this project, I clarify the meaning of consequentialism and explain how consequentialists understand and justify rights, including the right of national defense. International law enshrines that right. After explaining why it is correct to do so and why that right should be upheld, I examine some issues that this right leaves unsettled and probe its moral limits. I then reply to several objections to a consequentialist approach to national defense, pursuing in particular the criticism that consequentialists cannot justify the Allies’ having taken up defensive arms against the Axis powers in World War II.
21 citations
TL;DR: In this article, it is shown that there are other ways of handling the kind of political problem observed by Schmitt than what he and his followers are offering, and that attempts to apply Schmitt's concept of "the exception" seldom are persuasive and sometimes even contradictory to Schmitts theory.
Abstract: This article is about the politics of ‘the exception’ and the role of ‘exceptionalism’ in contemporary international theory. The concept of ‘the exception’ was coined by Carl Schmitt and has in recent years become an inspiration for international relations theorists and foreign policy analysts, especially when engaging with issues such as great power politics, humanitarian intervention and the war against terrorism. It is concluded that attempts to apply Schmitt’s concept of ‘the exception’ seldom are persuasive and sometimes even contradictory to Schmitt’s theory. When dealt with out of context, ‘the exception’ becomes just an expression about something else. It is shown that there are other ways of handling the kind of political problem observed by Schmitt than what he and his followers are offering.
18 citations
TL;DR: The authors explored feminist contentions over pacifism and non-violence in the context of the Greenham Common Peace Camp in the 1980s and later developments of feminist Just War Theory and argued that Sara Ruddick's work puts feminist pacifism, its radical feminist critics and feminist just war theory equally into question.
Abstract: This article explores feminist contentions over pacifism and non-violence in the context of the Greenham Common Peace Camp in the 1980s and later developments of feminist Just War Theory. We argue that Sara Ruddick’s work puts feminist pacifism, its radical feminist critics and feminist just war theory equally into question. Although Ruddick does not resolve the contestations within feminism over peace, violence and the questions of war, she offers a productive way of holding the tension between them. In our judgment, her work is helpful not only for developing a feminist political response to the threats and temptations of violent strategies but also for thinking through the question of the relation between violence and politics as such.
18 citations
TL;DR: The self-determination argument for immigration restrictions has been criticised by as discussed by the authors, who argue that if it is morally permissible for states to restrict immigration, then it can also be morally permissible to deport and denationalize their own citizens.
Abstract: Several political theorists argue that states have rights to self-determination and these rights justify immigration restrictions. Call this: the self-determination argument for immigration restrictions. In this article, I develop an objection to the self- determination argument. I argue that if it is morally permissible for states to restrict immigration because they have rights to self-determination, then it can also be morally permissible for states to deport and denationalize their own citizens. We can either accept that it is permissible for states to deport and denationalize their own citizens or reject the self-determination argument. To avoid this implication, we should reject the self-determination argument. That is, we should also reject the conclusion that rights to self-determination can justify any significant immigration restrictions.
16 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors take as its starting point Sara Ruddick's discussion of vulnerability in her 1989 groundbreaking book Maternal Thinking: Toward a Politics of Peace, and examine the kind of thinking that leads to vulnerability.
Abstract: This article takes as its starting point Sara Ruddick’s discussion of “vulnerability” in her 1989 groundbreaking book Maternal Thinking: Toward a Politics of Peace. It examines the kind of thinking...
16 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the relationship between Hegel's ideas and those of three Twentieth Century theorists who might be associated with these theoretical positions and these different readings of Hegel, namely, Carl Schmitt, Alexandre Kojeve and Jurgen Habermas.
Abstract: This article discusses Hegel’s views on global politics by relating them to the ‘communitarianism versus cosmopolitanism’ debate. I distinguish between three different theoretical positions and three different readings of Hegel, which I associate with the notions of ‘communitarianism,’ ‘strong cosmopolitanism’ and ‘weak cosmopolitanism’ respectively. Contrary to a commonly held view that Hegel is not a cosmopolitan thinker at all, in any sense of the term, I argue that he is best thought of as a weak cosmopolitan thinker rather than a communitarian or a strong cosmopolitan advocate of the idea of a world-state. In passing, the article refers to the relationship which exists between Hegel’s ideas and those of three Twentieth Century theorists who might be associated with these theoretical positions and these different readings of Hegel, namely, Carl Schmitt, Alexandre Kojeve and Jurgen Habermas. The article also refers to the methodological problems which are confronted by readers of Hegel’s writings who wish to apply his ideas to the problems of global politics today. Here I refer to a distinction which I have made elsewhere between different kinds of reading, namely the interpretation, appropriation and the reconstruction of texts, which is especially relevant for readers of the works of Hegel.
14 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the effects of speed in global politics through the lens of what it terms "Brown's Paradox", the insight that, in a radically accelerating world we "fee...
Abstract: This article is an engagement with the effects of speed in global politics through the lens of what it terms “Brown’s Paradox,” Wendy Brown’s insight that, in a radically accelerating world we “fee...
13 citations
TL;DR: This article examined the ways in which the pessimistic interpretation of the world that the young Nietzsche derives from his study of Greek tragedy leads him to adopt a distinctive attitude towards politics that he later designates as a form of realism.
Abstract: This article offers a critical engagement with Friedrich Nietzsche’s discourse on tragedy and explores its main political implications. The study first examines the ways in which the pessimistic interpretation of the world that the young Nietzsche derives from his study of Greek tragedy leads him to adopt a distinctive attitude towards politics that he later designates as a form of ‘realism’. We then consider how this discourse develops in his mature writings, and flesh out its normative fabric through a reconstruction of Nietzsche’s critique of Europe’s political culture of raison d’etat. Through this layered exegesis, we gain a better appreciation of the politics of this important episode of intellectual history, as well as timely insights into the troubled relationship between security, secularisation and political agency under conditions of late modernity. The concluding analysis highlights the originality and continued relevance of Nietzsche’s tragic pathos as a vehicle for critical reflection and po...
12 citations
TL;DR: In the context of debates about liberalism and colonialism, the arguments of Adam Smith have been taken as illustrative of an important line of anti-colonist liberal thought.
Abstract: In the context of debates about liberalism and colonialism, the arguments of Adam Smith have been taken as illustrative of an important line of anti-colonial liberal thought. The reading of Smith p...
12 citations
TL;DR: This article argued that while Ruddick's Maternal Thinking has often been read as a normative ethics that asserts the moral authority of mothers' voices and ways of being, it can also be read as feminist political theory, which provides feminists with a critical resource for considering the ways that masculinist power can drive a wedge between mothers and feminists.
Abstract: Using the debate surrounding the Canadian government’s 2008 Muskoka Initiative on Maternal, Newborn and Child Health as a central example, this article considers the construction of women and women’s health in global health policy. Specifically, it considers the contributions of Sara Ruddick’s philosophy to the task of unravelling the ethical and political meanings of ‘motherhood’, and the relationship between maternal thinking and feminist politics in global social policy. This article argues that while Ruddick’s Maternal Thinking has often been read as a normative ethics that asserts the moral authority of mothers’ voices and ways of being, it can also be read as a feminist political theory. In particular, Ruddick’s work provides feminists with a critical resource for considering the ways that masculinist power can drive a wedge between ‘mothers’ and ‘feminists’, thereby obscuring the need for feminism to consider all aspects of mothering as central to their political goals. Far from limiting our unders...
TL;DR: This paper explored the implications of Charles Taylor's politics of recognition for a global feminist theory and argued that Taylor's thought implies an innovative dialogue about human rights that assists a flexible understanding of diverse women's needs.
Abstract: This article explores the implications of Charles Taylor’s politics of recognition for a global feminist theory. The main contention is that Taylor’s thought implies an innovative dialogue about human rights that assists a flexible understanding of diverse women’s needs. This central claim is developed, however unexpectedly, by focusing on the controversial practice of footbinding. Prevalent in imperial China, this debilitating convention was supported by values that contrast markedly with those of the modern West. The case thus confronts global feminists with the serious issue of comprehending sympathetically the lived concerns of diverse human beings, while reacting critically to the oppression that they may experience. A creative reading of Taylor’s theory here yields, I argue, commitments to two normative claims that I call ‘narrativity’ and ‘instability’. Together, these claims promise not a static form of recognition based on uncontroversial rights to autonomy or bodily integrity but an imaginative ...
TL;DR: The idea for this special symposium, and the International Studies Association conference panel from which it developed, emerged out of a shared conviction that Ruddick's work represents "intellectual gold" for the practice and theory of international relations as well as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Sara Ruddick’s (1980) first work on “maternal thinking” was published in 1980. It is important to realize just how strange her ideas seemed to many people—including many feminists—at that time. Not only did she dare to suggest that the practices of mothering may give rise to a certain kind of moral thinking, she sought to turn that thinking to political use. In suggesting that mothers might contribute in distinctive ways to imagining or creating peace (Ruddick, 1995: xix), Ruddick was dismissed by philosophers, criticized by feminists and ignored by theorists of international politics. But she also set in motion waves of feminist research which would be inspired by her groundbreaking ideas on ethics, mothering, and peace. In honoring Sara Ruddick with a Distinguished Woman Philosopher Award from the Society of Women in Philosophy in 2002, Hilde Lindemann Nelson (2003) so described Ruddick’s contribution to philosophy: “Like a medieval sage in possession of the philosopher’s stone, Sally has taken the dishonored dross of the work of mothering and turned it into intellectual gold” (p. 85). The idea for this special symposium, and the International Studies Association conference panel from which it developed, emerged out of a shared conviction that Ruddick’s work represents “intellectual gold” for the practice and theory of international relations (IR) as well. While at first sight, and to the uncritical eye, a philosophy of “mothering” might seem antithetical to the “high politics” of IR, we argue that this simplistic assumption is mistaken. Contrary to widespread perception, Ruddick’s insights on mothering, violence, and peace are intensely political, and her arguments about the nature of morality and moral judgment represent an important alternative to dominant, rationalist approaches in the discipline. While we are pleased to
TL;DR: May's work on the normative foundations of international criminal law as mentioned in this paper is one of the most important works in the field of legal theory. But it has been criticised for its lack of rigour.
Abstract: The purpose of this review essay is to cast a critical, yet admiring, look at what can only be described as today’s most ambitious attempt to infuse the Just War tradition with new and much-needed lifeblood: Larry May’s extensive work on the normative foundations of international criminal law surely marks a milestone in the academic debate. The sheer scope of the project is staggering. May has managed to comprehensively address virtually every problem in this debate: from the crimes prosecuted at Nuremberg – war crimes (2007), crimes against humanity (2005) and crimes against peace (2008) – to genocide (2010), due process (2011) and transitional justice (2012). Even a quick glance at the pages of this multi-volume project will surely reveal that May has provided us with what can only be called, perhaps somewhat emphatically, a system of thought. Before delving into the more detailed discussion of the books under review, a word on the very nature of May’s endeavour. Its systematic design makes it the kind of project that will be of relevance to a wide range of audiences in academia, and possibly even beyond: from legal theorists, to international lawyers, political philosophers and historians of political thought – they all have something to learn from these books, no matter whether they will ultimately find themselves in complete agreement with May’s conclusions or not. The reason for this broad appeal is rather simple: Those who generally share May’s understanding of international criminal law will be delighted to realize that he has
TL;DR: The authors argue that despite some structural obstacles, "careful drivers" are able to negotiate their way along the road to development and it is wrong to place responsibility solely on those who have constructed the route.
Abstract: David Miller criticises Thomas Pogge for placing excessive emphasis on the global environment in identifying the sources of global poverty. Miller argues that despite some structural obstacles, ‘careful drivers’ are able to negotiate their way along the road to development and it is wrong to place responsibility solely on those who have constructed the route. This article questions the analogy. It is argued that the complexities of global poverty make any attempt to identify straightforward outcome responsibility problematic, and that both Miller and Pogge’s interpretations of its causes may be regarded as partial. Furthermore, the analogy deployed by Miller reflects a reified notion of development, either explicit or assumed in arguments on global justice. An analogy of development as an anarchic car race is presented to initiate these criticisms, and as a premise for articulating John Rawls’ duty of assistance as a promising alternative – one that avoids the question of outcome responsibility, while being less prone to the accusation of ‘parochialism’.
TL;DR: Holbach is a largely forgotten figure of the history of ideas as discussed by the authors, yet his work was influential on a number of historical thinkers, notably Marx. Famous for his materialistic atheism, Holbach has much...
Abstract: Holbach is a largely forgotten figure of the history of ideas. Yet his work was influential on a number of historical thinkers, notably Marx. Famous for his materialistic atheism, Holbach has much ...
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that Kant's rejection of a coercive world republic is based on his conception of state sovereignty and what is required for a lawful condition, and they propose a voluntary, non-coercive federation of states as a substitute.
Abstract: Although Kant argues that a world republic with coercive public law is the only rational way to secure a lawful cosmopolitan condition, he states that it is an unachievable ideal, and he proposes a voluntary, non-coercive federation of states as a substitute. While some scholars have criticized Kant for moving away from this ideal due merely to pragmatic considerations, I argue that his rejection of a coercive world republic is based on his conception of state sovereignty and what is required for a lawful condition. I consider how we can institutionalize a lawful condition between states without a coercive world republic in ways that go beyond Kant’s voluntary federation. I also consider how we can resolve this dilemma in Kant’s account to support a federal world republic.
TL;DR: This paper argued that if there are supreme emergencies as Walzer describes them, then situations in which war can justifiably be waged are, and ought to be, such emergencies; the killing does not need to be intentional in some narrower sense for that to be the case.
Abstract: This is a critique of the way in which Michael Walzer applies the concept of supreme emergencies in war. It aims to show that Walzer is mistaken in reserving this concept, as well as the associated notion of dirty hands, for situations in which political communities, in a desperate struggle for survival, cannot help but kill innocents intentionally, rather than merely with foresight. If moral agents have moral reasons to proceed in a way which will foreseeably result in innocent people being killed, they are already facing a supreme emergency; the killing does not need to be intentional in some narrower sense for that to be the case. This article stays agnostic on whether or not war can be morally justified in principle, and also on whether or not a dirty hands conception of war is ultimately defensible. It merely argues that if there are supreme emergencies as Walzer describes them, then situations in which war can justifiably be waged are, and ought to be, such emergencies.
TL;DR: In this paper, a review essay argues that the R2P debate can best be grasped when focussing on two connected themes: the relationship between law and politics, and the role of norms and language.
Abstract: The ongoing debate on the ‘Responsibility to Protect’, better known as R2P or RtoP can best be grasped, this review essay argues, when focussing on two connected themes: the relationship between law and politics, and the role of norms and language. The two themes, however, are not only at the core of the debate about R2P; they are also at the core of constructivist approaches in International Relations (IR) theory. Hence, the essay casts a constructivist view on the debate surrounding R2P. More specifically, the constructivist understanding of norms and language can offer insights that help us to better understand both the development and the current practices surrounding R2P. Furthermore, the essay claims that such a perspective opens up the question of how R2P matters for the ‘making of our world’ (Onuf, 1989). The overwhelming amount of literature on the R2P makes it seem impossible at times to follow the debate in every detail.1 It is a little surprising, therefore, that scholars have started to categorise the existing literature (Loges, 2013: 116–127). However, I contend that three ideal-type categories can be identified, which in fact are embodied by the three books discussed here: advocacy (Bellamy, 2011), critical (Hehir, 2012) and analytical (Orford, 2011). Advocacy literature finds something inherently good in the idea of R2P. This work, while cognisant of weaknesses in R2P, aims via analysis and