|
Showing 1 - 8 of
8 matches in All Departments
This book presents a novel proposal for establishing justice and
social harmony in the aftermath of genocide. It argues that justice
should be determined by the victims of genocide rather than a
detached legal system, since such a form of justice is more
consistent with a socially grounded ethics, with a democracy that
privileges citizen decision-making, and with human rights. The book
covers the Holocaust; genocides in Argentina, South Africa, Rwanda,
Latin America, and Australia, as well as crimes against humanity in
Italy and France. From show trials to state- enforced forgiveness,
the book examines various methods that have been used since 1945 to
punish the individuals and groups responsible for genocide and how
they have ultimately failed to deliver true justice to the victims.
The only way to end this failure, the book points out, is to return
justice to the victims. This simple proposition; however,
challenges the Enlightenment tradition of Western law which was
built on the refusal to allow victims to determine the measure of
justice. That would amount, according to Bacon, Hegel, and Kant to
a revenge system and bring social chaos. But, as this book points
out, forgiveness is only something victims can give, no-one can
demand it. In order to establish a lasting peace, it is necessary
to re-examine the philosophical and theoretical refusal to return
justice to the victims. The engaging argument put forth in this
book can help deliver true justice and re-establish international
social harmony in the aftermath of genocide. Genocide is ubiquitous
in the modern, global world. It's understanding is highly relevant
for the understanding of specific and perpetuating challenges in
migration. Genocide forces the migration of millions to avoid
crimes against humanity. When they flee war zones they bring their
fears, hates, and misery with them. So migration research must
engage fully with the experience of genocide, its human conseque
nces and the ethical dilemmas it poses to all societies. Not to do
so, will make it more difficult to understand and live with
newcomers and to achieve some sort of harmony in host countries, as
well as those which are centers of genocide.
This book presents a novel proposal for establishing justice and
social harmony in the aftermath of genocide. It argues that justice
should be determined by the victims of genocide rather than a
detached legal system, since such a form of justice is more
consistent with a socially grounded ethics, with a democracy that
privileges citizen decision-making, and with human rights. The book
covers the Holocaust; genocides in Argentina, South Africa, Rwanda,
Latin America, and Australia, as well as crimes against humanity in
Italy and France. From show trials to state- enforced forgiveness,
the book examines various methods that have been used since 1945 to
punish the individuals and groups responsible for genocide and how
they have ultimately failed to deliver true justice to the victims.
The only way to end this failure, the book points out, is to return
justice to the victims. This simple proposition; however,
challenges the Enlightenment tradition of Western law which was
built on the refusal to allow victims to determine the measure of
justice. That would amount, according to Bacon, Hegel, and Kant to
a revenge system and bring social chaos. But, as this book points
out, forgiveness is only something victims can give, no-one can
demand it. In order to establish a lasting peace, it is necessary
to re-examine the philosophical and theoretical refusal to return
justice to the victims. The engaging argument put forth in this
book can help deliver true justice and re-establish international
social harmony in the aftermath of genocide. Genocide is ubiquitous
in the modern, global world. It's understanding is highly relevant
for the understanding of specific and perpetuating challenges in
migration. Genocide forces the migration of millions to avoid
crimes against humanity. When they flee war zones they bring their
fears, hates, and misery with them. So migration research must
engage fully with the experience of genocide, its human conseque
nces and the ethical dilemmas it poses to all societies. Not to do
so, will make it more difficult to understand and live with
newcomers and to achieve some sort of harmony in host countries, as
well as those which are centers of genocide.
The key question for the history of universal human rights is why
it took so long for them to become established as law. The main
theme of this book is that the attainment of universal human rights
required heroic struggle, first by individuals and then by
ever-increasing numbers of people who supported those views against
the major historical trends. Universal human rights are won from a
hostile majority by outsiders. The chapters in the book describe
the milestones in that struggle. The history presented in this book
shows that, in most places at most times, even today, for concrete
material reasons a great many people oppose the notion that all
individuals have equal rights. The dominant history since the 1600s
has been that of a mass struggle for the national-democratic state.
This book argues that this struggle for national rights has been
practically and logically contradictory with the struggle for
universal rights. It would only be otherwise if there were free
migration and access to citizenship on demand by anybody. This has
never been the case. Rather than drawing only on European sources
and being limited to major literary figures, this book is written
from the Gramscian perspective that ideas mean little until they
are taken up as mass ideologies. It draws on sources from Asia and
America and on knowledge about mass attitudes, globally and
throughout history.
The key question for the history of universal human rights is why
it took so long for them to become established as law. The main
theme of this book is that the attainment of universal human rights
required heroic struggle, first by individuals and then by
ever-increasing numbers of people who supported those views against
the major historical trends. Universal human rights are won from a
hostile majority by outsiders. The chapters in the book describe
the milestones in that struggle. The history presented in this book
shows that, in most places at most times, even today, for concrete
material reasons a great many people oppose the notion that all
individuals have equal rights. The dominant history since the 1600s
has been that of a mass struggle for the national-democratic state.
This book argues that this struggle for national rights has been
practically and logically contradictory with the struggle for
universal rights. It would only be otherwise if there were free
migration and access to citizenship on demand by anybody. This has
never been the case. Rather than drawing only on European sources
and being limited to major literary figures, this book is written
from the Gramscian perspective that ideas mean little until they
are taken up as mass ideologies. It draws on sources from Asia and
America and on knowledge about mass attitudes, globally and
throughout history.
In the modern State, power rests on the consensus of the citizens.
They accord its institutions the authority to regulate society.
State theory suggests that this authority is a right to speak on
certain matters in certain ways and to have the audience agree with
those statements. It is a matter of an authorised language; all
others fall into the category of ratbaggery. In this 1991 book, the
first major book applying State theory to Australia, Alastair
Davidson shows how Australian citizens were formed in the
nineteenth century, and how their particular characteristics led to
the empowering of a certain language of power: legalism. He further
shows that this made the judiciary the most powerful arm of
government - unlike countries where the people arm sovereign and
the legislature supreme - because the judiciary has the last say on
all issues and in its own language.
Few revolutionaries have a heritage so contested by rival groups as
Antonio Gramsci. Many use his writings as sacred texts' for their
own policies, and while others stress any differences with Lenin in
order to prove Gramsci a rebel.' In this stirring biography,
Davidson cuts through these sterile debates and instead focuses on
Gramsci's own political and philosophical ideas.
The Invisible State is the first major book applying contemporary state theory to Australia. Professor Davidson takes a historical approach, tracing the development of the Australian citizen in the nineteenth century and examining the relationship of the citizen to the state. The book argues that giving the judiciary the last say about matters of state divests the people of ultimate authority and ends the supremacy of the legislature elected by the people.
This important, theoretically sophisticated work explores the
concepts of liberal democracy, citizenship and rights. Grounded in
critical original research, the book examines Australia's political
and legal institutions, and traces the history and future of
citizenship and the state in Australia. The central theme is that
making proof of belonging to the national culture a precondition of
citizenship is inappropriate for a multicultural society such as
Australia. This becomes an object lesson for the multicultural
regional polities forming throughout the world.
|
|