Gesellschaftswissenschaften
Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (192) (remove)
Document Type
- Report (104)
- Article (53)
- Review (12)
- Contribution to a Periodical (9)
- Part of Periodical (6)
- Working Paper (3)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
- Book (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (192)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (192)
Keywords
- Adorno (6)
- global justice (5)
- Reconhecimento (4)
- Theodor W. Adorno (4)
- Axel Honneth (3)
- Donald Trump (3)
- Honneth (3)
- Recognition (3)
- Critical theory (2)
- Cuidado em saúde (2)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (192)
- Philosophie (32)
- Institut für Sozialforschung (IFS) (31)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (20)
- Präsidium (12)
- Hessische Stiftung für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung (HSFK) (3)
- Cornelia Goethe Centrum für Frauenstudien und die Erforschung der Geschlechterverhältnisse (CGC) (1)
- Kulturwissenschaften (1)
- Philosophie und Geschichtswissenschaften (1)
- Starker Start ins Studium: Qualitätspakt Lehre (1)
The paper assesses current rising reparations claims for the Maafa/ Maangamizi (‘African holocaust,’ comprising transatlantic slavery, colonialism and neo-colonialism) from two angles. First, it explores the connectivity of reparations and global justice, peace and security. Second, it discusses how the claim is justified in international law. The concept of reparations in international law is also explored, revealing that reparations cannot be limited to financial compensation due to the nature of the damage and international law prescriptions. Comprehensive reparations based in international law require the removal of structures built on centuries of illegal acts and aggression, in the forms of transatlantic slavery, colonialism and neo-colonialism. Reparations must also lead to the restitution of sovereignty to African and indigenous peoples globally. They are indispensable to halt the destruction of the earth as human habitat, caused by the violent European cultural, political, socio-economic system known as apitalism that is rooted in transatlantic slavery.
From reparations for slavery to international racial justice: a critical republican perspective
(2017)
This paper focuses on demands for reparations for colonial slavery and their public reception in France. It argues that this bottom-up, context-sensitive approach to theorising reparations enables us to formulate a critical republican theory of international racial justice. It contrasts the critical republican perspective on reparations with a nation-state centred approach in which reparations activists are accused of threatening the French republic’s sense of homogeneity and unity, thus undermining the national narrative on the French identity. It also rejects the liberal egalitarian perspective, which itself rejects reparations in favour of focusing on present disadvantages. In so doing, this paper illustrates how the notion of non-domination offers a superior way of conceptualising global racial injustices compared to more traditional distributive outlooks.
If Third World women form ‘the bedrock of a certain kind of global exploitation of labour,’ as Chandra Mohanty argues, how can our theoretical definitions of exploitation account for this? This paper argues that liberal theories of exploitation are insufficiently structural and that Marxian accounts are structural but are insufficiently intersectional. What we need is a structural and intersectional definition of exploitation in order to correctly identify global structural exploitation. Drawing on feminist, critical race/post-colonial and post-Fordist critiques of the Marxist definition and the intersectional accounts of Maria Mies and Iris Marion Young, this paper offers the following definition of structural exploitation: structural exploitation refers to the forced transfer of the productive powers of groups positioned as socially inferior to the advantage of groups positioned as socially superior. Global structural exploitation is a form of global injustice because it is a form of oppression.
Many theories of global distributive justice are based on the assumption that all humans hold common ownership of the earth. As the earth is finite and our actions interconnect, we need a system of justice that regulates the potential appropriation of the common earth to ensure fairness. According to these theories, imposing limits and distributive obligations on private and public property arrangements may be the best mechanism for governing common ownership. We present a critique of the assumption that this issue can be solved within the private–public property regime, arguing that the boundaries of this regime should not be taken for granted and that the growing literature on the democratic commons movement suggests how this can be accomplished. We consider that, if the earth is defined as a common, the private– public property paradigm must be open to questioning, and democratic commoners’ activities should be considered.
All cosmopolitan approaches to global distributive justice are premised on the idea that humans are the primary units of moral concern. In this paper, I argue that neither relational nor non-relational cosmopolitans can unquestioningly assume the moral primacy of humans. Furthermore, I argue that, by their own lights, cosmopolitans must extend the scope of justice to most, if not all, nonhuman animals. To demonstrate that cosmopolitans cannot simply ‘add nonhuman animals and stir,’ I examine the cosmopolitan position developed by Martha Nussbaum in Frontiers of Justice. I argue that while Nussbaum explicitly includes nonhuman animals within the scope of justice, her account is marked by an unjustifiable anthropocentric bias. I ultimately conclude that we must radically reconceptualise the primary unit of cosmopolitan moral concern to encompass most, if not all, sentient animals.
Rezension inside islam
(2017)
Das Internet ist allgegenwärtig - so allgegenwärtig, dass es inzwischen in gewissen Kreisen en vogue ist, sich ab und an komplett vom Internet abzukapseln. Passend zur vorösterlichen Zeit könnte man von Internetfasten sprechen. Aber was passiert, wenn das Internet einfach komplett abgestellt wird, für alle? Was für uns primär eine akademische Fragestellung ist, ist in Kamerun, Indien, Pakistan und vielen anderen Ländern Realität. Diese Beispiele verdeutlichen nicht nur wie Internetabschaltung ein Instrument sozialer und politischer Kontrolle sind, sie zeigen auch ihre dramatischen Auswirkungen. Das Thema sollte uns auch hier interessieren...