Normative orders working paper : Normative Orders, Cluster of Excellence at Goethe University Frankfurt, Main
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (37)
Has Fulltext
- yes (37)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (37)
Keywords
- Normative Ordnungen (6)
- Global Governance (4)
- Normative Orders (4)
- Critique (3)
- Gerechtigkeit (3)
- Internet (3)
- Justification (3)
- Kritik (3)
- Rechtspluralismus (3)
- Außenpolitik (2)
Institute
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (37) (remove)
2010, 03
Der vorliegende Beitrag versucht in Grundzügen zwei große thematische und theoretische Stränge zu bearbeiten, die im Begriff der Positiven Generalprävention miteinander verwoben sind. Der eine Strang kann dabei nicht mehr leisten, als erst einmal eine Ahnung von den Herausforderungen zu vermitteln, die das Völkerstrafrecht und seine Kriminologie an die im nationalen Strafrecht geläufigen Strafzwecke stellt; der andere Strang arbeitet dann ausführlicher kriminologisch, rechts- und normentheoretisch heraus, was das Völkerstrafrecht mit seinem Verfahren und seinen Sanktionen - immer gemessen an seinen eigenen immanenten und teilweise noch impliziten Ansprüchen - an expliziten Rechtswirkungen jedenfalls dann anstreben muss, wenn es, wie das nationalstaatliche Strafrecht auch, ein dezidiert präventiv ausgerichtetes Schuldstrafrecht sein und bleiben möchte. Beide Stränge treffen sich schließlich in der Überlegung, dass das Völkerstrafecht in vielfacher, hier dann auch näher erläuterter Weise eine „neue Form“ von Strafrecht ist, dessen Zweckbestimmung sich zwar der teleologischen Semantik des nationalen Strafrechts bedienen darf, die aber aus der Natur seines Gegenstandes heraus etwas ganz anderes und auch Neues bedeuten muss.
2017,01
Der Beitrag arbeitet die moralische Subjektivierungsform ökonomischer Verschuldung heraus. In Auseinandersetzung mit Friedrich Nietzsche, Max Weber und Pierre Bourdieu wird argumentiert, dass die Form der Verschuldung durch eine spezifische Zeitlichkeit geprägt ist. Die zentrale These lautet, dass sich das Zeitregime von Schuld und Schulden als paradox erweist: Einerseits ermöglicht die moderne "Entzauberung der Welt" (Max Weber) eine Öffnung auf gesellschaftliche Zukünfte hin und diese temporale Öffnung bildet auch eine notwendige Bedingung kapitalistischer Investitionstätigkeiten. Andererseits verstellt das gegenwärtige rigide Zeitregime der Schuld(en) jedoch die Möglichkeit subjektiver und politischer neuer Anfänge in der Zeit, da die Verschuldung eine Dynamik der ökonomischen Determinierung gegenwärtiger Handlungsoptionen durch den Zwang zur Rückzahlung ins Werk setzt.
2011, 04
The title I have chosen seems to signal a tension, even a contradiction, in a number of respects. Democracy appears to be a form of political organisation and government in which, through general and public participatory procedures, a sufficiently legitimate political will is formed which acquires the force of law. Justice, by contrast, appears to be a value external to this context which is not so much linked to procedures of “input” or “throughput” legitimation but is understood instead as an output- or outcome-oriented concept. At times, justice is even understood as an otherworldly idea which, when transported into the Platonic cave, merely causes trouble and ends up as an undemocratic elite project. In methodological terms, too, this difference is sometimes signalled in terms of a contrast between a form of “worldly” political thought and “abstract” and otherworldly philosophical reflection on justice. In my view, we are bound to talk past the issues to be discussed under the heading “transnational justice and democracy” unless we first root out false dichotomies such as the ones mentioned. My thesis will be that justice must be “secularised” or “grounded” both with regard to how we understand it and to its application to relations beyond the state.
2011, 06
The past thirty years have seen dramatic changes to the character of state membership regimes in which practices of easing access to membership for resident non-citizens, extending the franchise to expatriate citizens as well as, albeit in typically more limited ways, to resident non-citizens and an increasing toleration of dual nationality have become widespread. These processes of democratic inclusion, while variously motivated, represent an important trend in the contemporary political order in which we can discern two distinct shifts. The first concerns membership as a status and is characterised in terms of the movement from a simple distinction between single-nationality citizens and single-nationality aliens to a more complex structure of state membership in which we also find dual nationals and denizens (Baubock, 2007a:2395-6). The second shift relates to voting rights and is marked by the movement from the requirement that voting rights are grounded in both citizenship and residence to the relaxing of the joint character of this requirement such that citizenship or residence now increasingly serve as a basis for, at least partial, enfranchisement. In the light of these transformations, it is unsurprising that normative engagement with transnational citizenship – conceived in terms of the enjoyment of membership statuses in two (or more) states – has focused on the issues of access to, and maintenance of, national citizenship, on the one hand, and entitlement to voting rights, on the other hand.
2018,02
Europe is a key normative power. Its legitimacy as a force for ensuring the reign of rule of law in international relations is unparalleled. It also packs an economic punch. In data protection and the fight against cybercrime, European norms have been successfully globalized. The time is right to take the next step: Europe must now become the international normative leader for developing a new deal on internet governance. To ensure this, European powers should commit to rules that work in security, economic development and human rights on the internet and implement them in a reinvigorated IGF.
2010, 05
The concept of embeddedness plays a central role in the segment of economic sociology and social theory which is inspired by the works of Karl Polanyi. But to the extent that embeddedness is understood in a substantialist manner, implying the existence of a unitary lifeworld, the desire for embeddedness is an impossible aspiration under modern conditions. Throughout the modern era it is however possible to observe the emergence of complex societal stabilization mechanisms, which serve as substitutes to traditional forms of embeddedness. The emergence of function specific cultures, in the form of, for example, legal, political and scientific cultures, establishing a ‘second nature’ in the Hegelian sense, is one example of this. Other examples are (neo-)corporatist institutions which fulfilled a central stabilising role in classical modernity and the kind of network based governance arrangements which fulfil a similar position in today’s radicalised modernity.
2020, 01
Law is force of order. It reacts, usually with a necessary time delay, to technological pro-gress. Only twelve years after Samuel Morse presented the first workable telegraph sys-tem in New York in 1838 and six years after the first completed telegraph line from Wash-ington to Baltimore, central European states agreed on an international framework for tel-egraphs. It has been much more than twelve years since the technologies underlying the internet’s popularity today, such as the ‘World Wide Web’, were invented. No international framework has emerged, even though normative approaches abound. There are norms that are applied to the internet, but the recognition of the existence of an underlying, structuring order is missing. This motivates the present study.
2017,02
Very few people doubt that it is a fundamental demand of justice that members of legal-political normative orders ought to have legal rights that define their basic standing as subjects of such an order. But when it comes to the concrete understanding of such rights, debates abound. What is the nature of these rights – are they an expression of the sovereign will of individuals, or are they based on important human interests? How should these rights be justified – do they have a particular moral ground, and if so, only one or many?
2011, 01
Ernst Bloch pointed out in a particularly emphatic way that the concept of human dignity featured centrally in historical struggles against different forms of unjustified rule, i.e. domination – to which one must add that it continues to do so to the present day. The “upright gait,” putting an end to humiliation and insult: this is the most powerful demand, in both political and rhetorical terms, that a “human rights-based” claim expresses. It marks the emergence of a radical, context-transcending reference point immanent to social conflicts which raises fundamental questions concerning the customary opposition between immanent and transcendent criticism. For within the idiom of demanding respect for human dignity, a right is invoked “here and now,” in a particular, context-specific form, which at its core is owed to every human being as a person. Thus Bloch is in one respect correct when he asserts that human rights are not a natural “birthright” but must be achieved through struggle; but in another respect this struggle can develop its social power only if it has a firm and in a certain sense “absolute” normative anchor. Properly understood, it becomes apparent that these social conflicts always affect “two worlds”: the social reality, on the one hand, which is criticized in part or radically in the light of an ideal normative dimension, on the other. For those who engage in this criticism there is no doubt that the normative dimension is no less real than the reality to which they refuse to resign themselves. Those who critically transcend reality always also live elsewhere.
2016,01
The grammar of global law
(2016)
Legal grammar is understood as the conceptual and linguistic foundation on which legal decisions rest – law’s meta-structure, its argumentative techniques and its systematicity. The essay distinguishes between two ways of thinking about this grammar. The first way of thinking appeals to a grammar as a stabilizing factor, maintaining the coherence of the law. The second way of thinking highlights the asymmetries of power within this structure and perceives legal grammar as the medium carrying the ideological commitments of the law. As the essay ultimately argues, both perspectives react differently to the challenges of globalization that the law is confronted with. While the debate on the grammar(s) of global law is one place where future political order is negotiated, the outcome of the debate is largely open.