Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality
TL;DR: Lawler as mentioned in this paper argued that being for the freeze means that one is not for disarmament, which is hardly a rational position in the sense that it is suspect if not immoral, in the eyes of some.
Abstract: that a plurality of the American Catholic bishops endorse a nuclear freeze (p. 4), saying that they are thus "taking their stance with Moscow,55 which is for a freeze, and not with the Vatican, which "is still in favor of disarmament?not a freeze.55 To make any sense at all, Mr. Lawler must mean that being for the freeze means that one is not for disarmament? hardly a rational position. One recalls here the arguments, during the 19305s and 19405s, that being for racial justice in the United States was suspect if not immoral, in the eyes of some, because the communists also favored it.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the dilemma created by such controversies in the context of massification of higher education in Taiwan and attempt to provide solutions from both the theoretical and policy dimensions so that the constant conflict between equality and excellence can be reconciled.
Abstract: Equality and excellence are two core values underlying many educational endeavors; however, they are often in conflict and controversy. This article intends to examine the dilemma created by such controversies in the context of massification of higher education in Taiwan and attempt to provide solutions from both the theoretical and policy dimensions so that the constant conflict between equality and excellence can be reconciled.
4 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors assess the shortcomings of the European Citizenship project by highlighting the effects of its exclusivity and the limitations of its notion of inclusivity and propose a significantly modified vision of Union citizenship which would seek to overcome the current version's apparent limitations, elevating the standing of the at risk groups in such a way that their contribution to Union life is fully, and deservedly, recognised.
Abstract: The European Union is at the core of a supranational citizenship project. This supranational project resulted in a crystallised form of citizenship in 1992, although it has been subject to constant revision by the ECJ since then. Nonetheless, the basis on which this novel form of citizenship is predicated is the traditional national paradigm of citizenship, with all its inherent sensitivities and inhibitions replicated on the international stage. It will be suggested that this nation-centric focus is ultimately the single biggest failing of European Union citizenship and its greatest limitation. The very nature of the supranational entity is exclusionary, to the detriment of over a million individuals. This paper will address which sectors of the broader European society are most affected by European citizenship’s exclusive properties and will explore the Union’s obligations and its responsibility to include marginalised groups, particularly the stateless, refugees, and third country nationals on an equal footing with Member State nationals. The extent of the statelessness problem will form the main portion of the discussion with a view to considering the challenges these at risk individuals face on a daily basis and how they can be incorporated in the most effective way within the Union framework: such incorporation will, of necessity, also mandate an examination of surrounding human rights issues, all the more pressing in light of the post-Lisbon Union commitment to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. The stateless are not the only marginalised group found in Union territory: third country nationals who do not benefit from Directive 2003/109 nonetheless make a considerable contribution without receiving the same rights and freedoms as those serendipitous enough to call themselves ‘long-term residents’. The human rights and democratic bases of the Union appear to be undermined by the restrictive approach to inclusion that has, to date, been taken when addressing non-nationals’ incorporation under the citizenship umbrella. This paper aims to assess the shortcomings of the European Citizenship project by highlighting the effects of its exclusivity and the limitations of its notion of inclusivity. Rather than establishing a single supranational form of citizenship the Union has, instead, succeeded in developing a multi-tiered and hierarchical construct, far removed from the notion of ‘a broader community of peoples’. It will culminate in a proposal for a significantly modified vision of Union citizenship which would seek to overcome the current version’s apparent limitations, elevating the standing of the at risk groups in such a way that their contribution to Union life is fully, and deservedly, recognised.
4 citations
01 Jan 2020
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a set of criteria for identifying identities of persons in Latviešu: no indivīda prasa akceptēt neapstrīdamαs kopējās intereses, iekļauties kolektīvā un pieņemt tā piešķirto identitāti.
Abstract: “Paskatīties pāri savas sētas žogam”, “veidot kopīgu izpratni”, “vienot sabiedrību”... Socializācijas imperatīvs politiskajā, mediju un arī zinātņu diskursā latviešu valodā nav retums: no indivīda prasa akceptēt neapstrīdamās kopējās intereses, iekļauties kolektīvā un pieņemt tā piešķirto identitāti. Taču “ievērojama daļa” sabiedrības nevēlas līdzdarboties ar citiem, lai arī demokrātiskās valsts institūcijas to veicina1. Sociālās pasivitātes cēloņus pētnieki meklē personības līmenī un uzskata, ka uzvedību var mainīt, stiprinot indivīda nacionālo identitāti2. Daži zinātnieki
4 citations
Additional excerpts
...10 MacIntyre 1981; Taylor 1989; Walzer 1983....
[...]
Book Chapter•
01 Jan 2007
TL;DR: In this article, a debat feller wordt and de politieke inzet hoger is verwachten, and de discussie zich naar de meer algemene vraag of de overheid werkelijk kan sturen op het gebied van migratie.
Abstract: Migratie lijkt de redding van de politiek te zijn geweest. Als er een onderwerp is dat de laatste jaren gemoederen beroert, dat het politieke en publieke debat teruggebracht heeft, dat burgerinitiatieven heeft laten opbloeien, dat duidelijke tegenstellingen tussen politieke partijen laat zien, dan is dat het onderwerp van migratie en integratie. De aandacht springt daarbij naar steeds nieuwe items: bootvluchtelingen, het multiculturele drama, Antilliaanse jongeren, Poolse loodgieters, ama ’s, en noem maar op. In de debatten gaat het al snel over wat we van de overheid mo gen verwachten. Vaak is er de roep – en belofte – om nu daadkrachtig de inburgering ter hand te nemen, of de in stroom te reguleren. Over het algemeen gaat het dan om specifieke problemen en maatregelen: een regeling inburgering in het buitenland of het gebruik van een nieuwe methode om de leeftijd van alleenstaande asielzoekers vast te stellen, of zelfs omeennieuweVreemdelingenwet.Maar op enig moment, zeker als het debat feller wordt en de politieke inzet hoger, dan ‘verdiept’ de discussie zich naar de meer algemene vraag of de overheid werkelijk kan sturen op het gebied van migratie. Tegenstanders van restrictievere maatregelen voeren dan onder meer het argument aan dat al die maatregelen in de praktijk toch niet zullen werken. Kijk maar naar het hek dat figuurlijk aan de zuidgrens van Europa, en letterlijk aan de zuidgrens van de vs wordt opgetrokken. Duizenden en duizenden uit Noord-Afrika en uit Mexico weten er toch op de een of andere manier onderdoor, overheen of langs
4 citations
TL;DR: This article used prototype theory to illustrate the concept of social justice in school settings, particularly as it might inform the education of school leaders, and developed descriptions of school setting actions predicted to be perceived as prototypical of Social Justice in education, as well as of actions that were predicted to either be either peripheral or antithetical to the construct.
Abstract: We used prototype theory to illustrate the concept of social justice in school settings, particularly as it might inform the education of school leaders. Using expert input, we developed descriptions of school setting actions predicted to be perceived as prototypical of social justice in education, as well as of actions that were predicted to be either peripheral or antithetical to the construct. Panels of (a) social justice education faculty and (b) students in social justice–oriented school leadership doctoral programs rated the extent to which each of these resulting 46 actions characterized social justice. Data were analyzed to map the concept.
4 citations
Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."
...…civic virtue, right order (institutions), and specification of rights and entitlements as necessary for all persons to have what they deserve, be treated as they ought, and participate in their political communities (see, e.g., MacIntyre, 2007; Nussbaum, 2006; Rawls, 1999; Sen, 2009; Walzer, 1983)....
[...]