Human Rights And Relative Universalism

International Human Rights is a classic socio-legal study of the incompatibility and possible reconciliation of competing views of culture relativism and absolute fundamental human rights. It features prodigious research and insight that is much cited by academics and human rights lawyers and activists over two decades. Quality ebook edition features active Contents, linked notes, and proper presentation of text and charts. Are human rights universal? Universalists and cultural relativists have long been debating this question. In INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS, Alison Dundes Renteln reconciles the two positions and argues that, within the vast array of cultural practices and values, it is possible to create structural equivalents to rights in all societies. She poses that empirical cross-cultural research can reveal universal human rights standards, then demonstrates it through an analysis of the concept of measured retribution. INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS provides an unusual combination of abstract theory and empirical evidence. It will interest scholars and students in political science, sociology, anthropology, peace studies, cross-cultural research, and philosophy, as well as human rights activists.

(unseen), $12.95. Donnelly explicates and defends an account of human rights as universal rights. Considering the competing claims of the universality, particularity, and relativity of human rights, he argues that the historical contingency and particularity of human rights is completely compatible with a conception of human rights as universal moral rights, and thus does not require the acceptance of claims of cultural relativism. The book moves between theoretical argument and historical practice. Rigorous and tightly-reasoned, material and perspectives from many disciplines are incorporated. Paper edition Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

Is there universalism of human rights? If so, what are its scope and limits? This book is a doctrinal attempt to define universalism of human rights, as well as its scope and limits. The book presents tests of universalism on international, regional and national constitutional levels. It is maintained that universalism of human rights is both a ‘concept’ and a ‘normative reality’. The normative character of human rights is scrutinized through the study of international and regional agreements as well as national constitutions. As a consequence, limitations of normativity are identified, usually on the international level, and take the form of exceptions, reservations, and interpretations. The book is based on the General and National Reports which were originally presented at the 18th International Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law in Washington D.C. 2010.

This book argues that human rights cannot go global without going local. This important lesson from the winding debates on universalism and particularism raises intricate questions: what are human rights after all, given the dissent surrounding their foundations, content, and scope? What are legitimate deviances from classical human rights (law) and where should we draw “red lines”? Making a case for balancing conceptual openness and distinctness, this book addresses the key human rights issues of our time and opens up novel spaces for deliberation. It engages philosophical reasoning with law, politics, and religion and demonstrates that a meaningful relativist account of human rights is not only possible, but a sorely needed antidote to dogmatism and polarization.

First published in 1985. In this study, Donnelly distinguishes between "having a right" and "being right" and elaborates the distinction with great subtlety to show that rights have to be understood as action and not as a possession. This is done with such clarity and good sense that he is able to cast light on all aspects of the often confusing discussions of the natures and usages of "right". He illuminates an astonishing range of issues, from the limitations of Thomist and utilitarian conceptions of right to the confusions of many present-day defenders of rights, both in the West and the Third World. As importantly, Donnelly is centrally concerned with the human aspect of "human rights". He is thus able to rest his discussion of rights on a plausible philosophical anthropology as well as an appreciation of an historical dimension to human rights, and, at the end of his book, is able to open the door towards potential new developments in the discussion of human rights. Down the path he points us lies a reconciliation of the notion of individual rights with that of political community. This title will be of great interest to students of politics and philosophy.

This book measures the current institutional and political realities surrounding globalization against philosophical ideals. Though the contributors share no particular orthodoxy, they do share the conviction that human responsibility is possible in circumstances that often appear to deny human agency.

This volume considers the problem of legal universals at the level of the rule of law and human rights, which have fundamentally different pedigrees, and attempts to come to terms with the new unease arising from the universal application of human rights. Given the juridicization of human rights, rule of law and human rights expectations have become significantly intertwined: human rights are enforced with the instruments of the rule of law and are thus limited by the restricted reach thereof. The first section of this volume considers the difficulties of universalistic claims and offers a number of possible solutions for adapting universal expectations to specific contexts. The second section considers problems of human rights politics; sections three and four present empirical studies about the appearance and disappearance of the rule of law and fundamental rights in Western and non-Western societies. Special attention is paid to the problems of developing countries, with a specific focus on past and present developments in Iran. These empirical studies indicate that the acceptance of human rights and the rule of law is historically contingent and cannot simply be considered as a matter of culture.