Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"This book analyzes, first part describes the soft threats to human rights, derived from the devaluation of the politics and the productive economy with regard to the finance. It entails the concealment of the reality in the shape of exploitation as the tax havens and in the shape of marginalization of the persons with different abilities. The second part include a study of hard threats to human rights and examines two cases of failed states, Afghanistan and Somalia, in which the violence has supplanted the politics and the economy. In view of these situations it is necessary to rethink the force of classic ius gentium and the humanitarian right. The third part presents the European Union as a legal and political space in which conditions of a worthy life are better defended by means of the primacy of practical reason and social state of law, and by the requirement of peace as the main rule of international relations. "

"The post - cold war era has been observed to have coineded with increased academic interest in the phenomenon of globalization. Simultaneously, however, with the succes of the European community as a regional arrangement given to the study of regional integration as a phenomenon...."

"Summary: Micheline Ishay recounts the dramatic struggle for human rights across the ages in a book that brilliantly synthesizes historical and intellectual developments from the Mesopotamian Codes of Hammurabi to today's era of globalization. As she chronicles the clash of social movements, ideas, and armies that have played a part in this struggle, Ishay illustrates how the history of human rights has evolved from one era to the next through texts, cultural traditions, and creative expression. Writing with verve and extraordinary range, she develops a framework for understanding contemporary issues from the debate over globalization to the intervention in Kosovo to the climate for human rights after September 11, 2001. The only comprehensive history of human rights available, the book will be essential reading for anyone concerned with humankind's quest for justice and dignity. Ishay structures her chapters around six core questions that have shaped human rights debate and scholarship: What are the origins of human rights? Why did the European vision of human rights triumph over those of other civilizations? Has socialism made a lasting contribution to the legacy of human rights? Are human rights universal or culturally bound? Must human rights be sacrificed to the demands of national security? Is globalization eroding or advancing human rights? As she explores these questions, Ishay also incorporates notable documents--writings, speeches, and political statements--from activists, writers, and thinkers throughout history"

"For hundreds of years people have debated what a human is. Some claim humans are those with human DNA. Some claim humans are those with certain traits like rationality. Others say humans are those who are made in the image of God. Scholars in this debate think that if society accepts the wrong definition of a human, people will look at their neighbor as more of an animal, object, or machine-making maltreatment more likely. Despite their seriousness, these claims have never been empirically investigated. This book focuses on human rights as exemplary treatment, and shows that the definitions of a human promoted by biologists and philosophers actually are associated with less support for human rights. Those members of the public who agree with these definitions are less willing to sacrifice to stop genocides, and are more supportive of buying organs from poor people, experimenting on prisoners against their will, torturing people to potentially save lives, and having terminally ill people commit suicide to save money. It appears that the critics are right. However, few Americans agree with these definitions of a human, and looking at how most of the public defines a human, we see a much more nuanced picture, and the presently dominant definitions of a human are unlikely to lead to human rights abuses. Therefore, the critics are right about the definitions of a human promoted by academic biologists and philosophers, but because few Americans agree with these views, concern about widespread maltreatment is overblown."