Janna Thompson

This chapter examines the prospects for the R2P framework in combating women’s oppression, with specific attention to Bosnia in the 1990s and in Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. It argues that while mass rape in Bosnia did constitute ‘just cause’ for humanitarian intervention, other desiderata, like proportionality and likelihood of success, present greater difficulty. The chapter notes two assumptions commonly present in the humanitarian intervention debate. One, humanitarian intervention is supposed to target repressive states or murderous militias, not the cultural traditions of the population. Two, the repressing regime is ethnically, racially, religiously, or ideologically distinct from the repressed. It is argued that these assumptions did not hold in Afghanistan, since the Taliban’s repressive laws regarding women had some prior cultural basis in parts of the society. The chapter is more optimistic about a focus on women’s oppression in aspects of R2P other than military intervention: namely in prevention and rebuilding.

The political changes of recent years and the problems of poverty, the environment and nationalism have led to calls for the establishment of a just world order. But what would such a world be like? This book considers the concept of international justice as it has developed in traditional political theory from Hobbes to Marx and in contemporary writing on the subject. It develops a theory of international justice designed to take account of both individual freedom and the differences among communities.

In this timely study, Thompson presents a theory of intergenerational justice that gives citizens duties to past and future generations, showing why people can make legitimate demands of their successors and explaining what relationships between contemporary generations count as fair. What connects these various responsibilities and entitlements is a view about individual interests that both argues that individuals are motivated by intergenerational concerns, and that a polity that appropriately recognizes these interests must support and accept intergenerational responsibilities. The book ranges over the philosophical, ethical, political and environmental questions raised by intergenerational issues: how we can have duties to non-existent people, whether we can wrong the dead or be held responsible for what they did, what sacrifices we should make for our successors, and whether we have duties to people of the remote future. Encompassing the ethical problems created by demographic change, the ethical issues of population control and intergenerational implications of new technologies for creating people, this book will be of interest to those studying philosophy, politics, legal theory, and environmental studies.

Ethical disagreement is a fact of social life. We disagree about issues such as abortion, euthanasia, the meaning of justice and the treatment of animals, and our debates often fail to reach a consensus. Some philosophers think that this means there is no objective knowledge about morality. _ Discourse and Knowledge_ takes a radically different approach to the defence of ethical rationality. It claims that there is a correct solution to ethical controversies, but that ethical decisions have to be made collectively. Written specifically for those studying or teaching ethics or moral theory,_Discourse and Knowledge_ will also be ideal for those on courses on social theory, ethics or feminist philosophy.

In this timely study, Thompson presents a theory of intergenerational justice that gives citizens duties to past and future generations, showing why people can make legitimate demands of their successors and explaining what relationships between contemporary generations count as fair. What connects these various responsibilities and entitlements is a view about individual interests that both argues that individuals are motivated by intergenerational concerns, and that a polity that appropriately recognizes these interests must support and accept intergenerational responsibilities. The book ranges over the philosophical, ethical, political and environmental questions raised by intergenerational issues: how we can have duties to non-existent people, whether we can wrong the dead or be held responsible for what they did, what sacrifices we should make for our successors, and whether we have duties to people of the remote future. Encompassing the ethical problems created by demographic change, the ethical issues of population control and intergenerational implications of new technologies for creating people, this book will be of interest to those studying philosophy, politics, legal theory, and environmental studies.

The political changes of recent years and the problems of poverty, the environment and nationalism have led to calls for the establishment of a just world order. But what would such a world be like? This book considers the concept of international justice as it has developed in traditional political theory from Hobbes to Marx and in contemporary writing on the subject. It develops a theory of international justice designed to take account of both individual freedom and the differences among communities.

Ethical disagreement is a fact of social life. We disagree about issues such as abortion, euthanasia, the meaning of justice and the treatment of animals, and our debates often fail to reach a consensus. Some philosophers think that this means there is no objective knowledge about morality. _ Discourse and Knowledge_ takes a radically different approach to the defence of ethical rationality. It claims that there is a correct solution to ethical controversies, but that ethical decisions have to be made collectively. Written specifically for those studying or teaching ethics or moral theory,_Discourse and Knowledge_ will also be ideal for those on courses on social theory, ethics or feminist philosophy.

Political societies are essentially intergenerational—not only because they often last for many generations and because they maintain their existence largely through members having or adopting children, but because the children of members acquire entitlements simply as a result of being born or adopted by members. Even in a liberal political society, members by birth or adoption are supposed to enjoy from birth the irrevocable status of membership and the privileges it entails. They have opportunities and civil rights that outsiders cannot claim. In liberal welfare states they are entitled to assistance in need. But from a liberal point of view birthright entitlements, and the obligations they entail, are problematic. I will discuss three attempts to justify them.

abstract Demands for restitution of cultural artefacts and relics raise four main issues: 1) how claims to cultural property can be justified; 2) whether and under what conditions demands for restitution of cultural property are valid — especially when they are made long after the artefacts were taken away; 3) whether there are values, aesthetic, scholarly and educational, which can override restitution claims, even when these claims are legitimate; and 4) how these values bear on the question of whether artefacts should be returned to their place of origin. I argue that a proper conception of cultural property emphasises the role that artefacts play in the practices and traditions of a collectivity. On the basis of this conception, some restitution claims can be defended as legitimate. However, many demands for restitution are not justified (including the Greek claim to the Parthenon Marbles). Moreover, a case for restitution can be more or less strong, and other considerations sometimes prevail over rights of cultural property.

Historical Justice and Memory highlights the global movement for historical justice—acknowledging and redressing historic wrongs—as one of the most significant moral and social developments of our times. Such historic wrongs include acts of genocide, slavery, systems of apartheid, the systematic persecution of presumed enemies of the state, colonialism, and the oppression of or discrimination against ethnic or religious minorities. The historical justice movement has inspired the spread of truth and reconciliation processes around the world and has pushed governments to make reparations and apologies for past wrongs. It has changed the public understanding of justice and the role of memory. In this book, leading scholars in philosophy, history, political science, and semiotics offer new essays that discuss and assess these momentous global developments. They evaluate the strength and weaknesses of the movement, its accomplishments and failings, its philosophical assumptions and social preconditions, and its prospects for the future.