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 discuss the contemporary constitution of neoliberal subjects via the devolution of select immigration powers to state and local governments by the federal government of the United States, through an exploration of relevant legislation and court cases.
Abstract: Through an exploration of relevant legislation and court cases, this article discusses the contemporary constitution of neoliberal subjects via the devolution of select immigration powers to state and local governments by the federal government of the United States. Since the latter decades of the nineteenth century, the federal government has had plenary power over immigration, which has enabled it to treat “people as immigrants” (or as “nonpersons” falling outside of many Constitutional protections), simultaneously requiring that states and cities treat “immigrants as people” (or as persons protected by the Constitution). Beginning in the mid-1990s, however, the devolution of welfare policy and immigration policing powers has challenged the scalar constitution of personhood, as state and local governments have newfound powers to discriminate on the basis of alienage, or noncitizen status. In devolving responsibility for certain immigration-related policies to state and local governments, the federal gov...
201 citations
Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."
...In his classic text, Spheres of Justice, Michael Walzer (1983) argues that democracies cannot tolerate a two-tiered society of citizens and noncitizens....
[...]
01 Aug 2006
200 citations
194 citations
Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."
...In general, justice principles tend to be different in the market than in the public sector, where equal treatment is required, and in civil society, where individual needs are key, although the boundaries between them are not necessarily closed (Walzer 1983)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the conflict over the community gardens in New York City and argue that this contest was an example of Lefebvre's "trial by space," and that ultimately, the struggles concerned the right to space, or "the right to the city."
Abstract: I examine the conflict over the community gardens in New York City. I argue that this contest was an example of Lefebvre's "trial by space," and that ultimately, the struggles concerned the right to space, or "the right to the city." The city, operating from the perspective of entrepreneurial governance, claimed that the gardens represented a loss of exchange value and potential housing. I contend that more was at stake: the gardens and gardeners represented a threat to the hegemonic project of the government to maximize exchange values and to beautify and sanitize the city. I also argue that the issues of commensurability and narrative were critical to the conflict. The city used the rhetoric of a market economy paradigm to dismiss incommensurable use values, thus restricting rights to the city within a demonstration of power and "reason." In response, the garden advocates resorted to "tactics" and other persuasive arguments.
193 citations
Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."
...Contemporary theorists have extended the usage to include phenomena that cannot be compared along a common metric (e.g., Radin, 1987; Sunstein, 1994; Walzer, 1983)....
[...]
Journal Article•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the changes vis-a-vis nationality and citizenship in the modern nationstate, and propose a set of tools for reconstructing citizenship analytically.
Abstract: The two foundational subjects for membership in the modern nationstate, the citizen and the alien, are undergoing significant changes in the current moment This becomes particularly evident in certain types of contexts foremost, among which are cities. These can be seen as productive spaces for informal or not-yet-formalized politics and subjects. In this examination of emergent possibilities, I first outline these changes vis-a-vis nationality and citizenship. Second, I dissect notions of national membership in order to create a set of tools for reconstructing citizenship analytically. In the third section, I delineate two key, incipient kinds of repositioned membership: unauthorized yet recognized subjects, and authorized yet unrecognized subjects. Fourth, I situate these repositionings within contemporary currents of citizenship theory. In the final section, I theorize the landscape of the global city as an especially salient site for the repositioning of citizenship in practice. At the scale of the city, and the particular urban space of the global city, there are dynamics that signal the possibilities for a politics of membership that is simultaneously localized and transnational.
190 citations