Intolerant Justice

In a globalized world, national legal systems often face dilemmas of international cooperation: Should our citizens stand trial in foreign courts that do not meet our standards? Should we extradite offenders to countries with a poor human rights record? Should we enforce rulings issued by foreign judges whose values are different from our own? Intolerant Justice argues that ethnocentrism--the human tendency to divide the world into superior in-groups and inferior out-groups--fuels fear and mistrust of foreign justice and sparks domestic political controversies: while skeptics portray foreign legal systems as dangerous and threatening, others dismiss these concerns. The book traces this dynamic in a range of fascinating cases, including the American hesitation to allow criminal trials of troops in the courts of NATO countries, the dilemma of extradition to China, and the European wariness toward U.S. civil judgments. Despite the growing role of law and courts in international politics, Intolerant Justice suggests that cooperation among legal systems often meets resistance and shows how this resistance can be overcome.

"Intolerant Justice examines how national legal systems handle dilemmas of international cooperation: Should our citizens stand trial in foreign courts that do not meet our standards? Should we extradite offenders to countries with a poor human rights record? Should we enforce rulings issued by foreign judges whose values are different from our own? This book argues that ethnocentrism - the human tendency to divide the world into superior in-groups and inferior out-groups - fuels fear and mistrust of foreign justice and sparks domestic political controversies: while skeptics portray foreign legal systems as a danger and threat, others dismiss these concerns. The book traces this dynamic in a range of cases, including the American hesitation to allow criminal trials of troops in the courts of NATO countries; the debate over the proper venue for trying Europeans who joined ISIS as foreign fighters; the dilemma of extradition to China; the British debate over extradition to the U.S. and the EU; the European wariness toward U.S. civil judgments; the American-British divide over free speech and libel suits; the establishment of mutual legal assistance treaties; and cooperation against child abduction. Despite the growing role of law and courts in international politics, Intolerant Justice suggests that cooperation among legal systems often meets resistance - and it shows how this resistance can be overcome"--

Annotation.

In this interdisciplinary and wide-ranging study, Roger Kennedy looks at the roots of tolerance and intolerance as well as the role of the stranger and strangeness in provoking basic fears about our identity. He argues that a fear of a loss of attachment to one’s home might account for many prejudiced and intolerant attitudes to refugees and migrants; that basic fears about being displaced by so-called ‘strangers’ from our precious and precarious sense of a psychic home can tear communities apart, as well as lead to discrimination against those who appear to be different. Present day intolerance includes fears about the ‘hordes’ of immigrants confused with realistic fears about terrorist attacks, populist fears about loss of cultural integrity and with it a sense of powerlessness, and fearful debates about such basics as truth, including the so-called ‘post truth’ issue. Such fears, as explored in the book, mirror old arguments going back centuries to the early enlightenment thinkers and even before, when the parameters of discussion about tolerance were mainly around religious tolerance. There is urgency about addressing these kinds of issue once more at a time when the ‘ground rules’ of what makes for a civilized society seem to be under threat. Kennedy argues that society needs a ‘tolerance process’, in which critical thinking and respectful judgment can take place in an atmosphere of debate and reasonably open communication, when issues around what can and cannot be tolerated about different beliefs, practices and attitudes in people in our own and other cultures, are examined and debated. Tolerating Strangers in Intolerant Times, with the help of psychoanalytic, literary, social and political thinking, looks at what such a tolerance process could look like in a world increasingly prone to intolerance and prejudice. It will appeal to psychoanalysts as well as scholars of politics and philosophy.

This book aims to examine and critically analyse the role that religion has and should have in the public and legal sphere. The main purpose of the book is to explain why religion, on the whole, should not be tolerated in a tolerant-liberal democracy and to describe exactly how it should not be tolerated – mainly by addressing legal issues. The main arguments of the book are, first, that as a general rule illiberal intolerance should not be tolerated; secondly, that there are meaningful, unique links between religion and intolerance, and between holding religious beliefs and holding intolerant views (and ultimately acting upon these views); and thirdly, that the religiosity of a legal claim is normally a reason, although not necessarily a prevailing one, not to accept that claim.

Employs the political philosophy of John Rawls to address controversies involving politics and religion.

This book introduces the reader to the political theories of the American philosopher John Rawls. Rawls was arguably the most important political philosopher of the twentieth century. Barely a word of political philosophy is written today that is not indebted in some way, either directly or indirectly, to the philosophical paradigm that Rawls bequeathed. On his death at aged 81 in 2002 his obituaries, written by some of the leading figures in Western philosophy, placed him alongside John Locke and Immanuel Kant in the canon of Western political philosophers. His colleague, the philosopher Hilary Putnam, said: ‘His work is not going to be forgotten for decades, I think, for centuries.’ Rawls Explained sets out Rawls’s complex arguments in a way that makes them accessible to first-time readers of his hugely influential work. This book is both clear in its exposition of Rawls’s ideas and is true to the complex purposes of his arguments. It also attends to the variety of objections that have been made to Rawls’s arguments since it is these objections that have shaped the progression of his work. Therefore the aim of the book is to explain the basic ideas of Rawls’s theory of justice in an engaging but comprehensive fashion and to guide the reader carefully through his arguments. The book is divided into three parts corresponding to the three books that form the core of Rawls’s theory: A Theory of Justice (1971), Political Liberalism (1993) and The Law of Peoples (1999). This volume sets out Rawls’s ideas in the form of a critical exposition that elaborates the central themes and philosophical background of his arguments. Each section of the book ends with a survey of some of the main criticisms of the arguments coupled with Rawls’s strongest counterarguments.

Why America is the most incarcerated country in the world. SEDM has the express written permission of the author to publish this work.