Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (803) (remove)
Language
- English (293)
- Portuguese (199)
- German (180)
- Spanish (62)
- Italian (24)
- French (11)
- Ukrainian (9)
- slo (7)
- Multiple languages (4)
- Catalan (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (803)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (803)
Keywords
- Adorno (51)
- Critical Theory (27)
- Reconhecimento (26)
- Recognition (24)
- Axel Honneth (23)
- global justice (23)
- Theodor W. Adorno (20)
- critical theory (20)
- Teoria Crítica (19)
- Frankfurt School (18)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (803) (remove)
t is becoming less and less controversial that we ought to aggressively combat climate change. One main reason for doing so is concern for future generations, as it is they who will be the most seriously affected by it. Surprisingly, none of the more prominent deontological theories of intergenerational justice can explain why it is wrong for the present generation to do very little to stop worsening the problem. This paper discusses three such theories, namely indirect reciprocity, common ownership of the earth and human rights. It shows that while indirect reciprocity and common ownership are both too undemanding, the human rights approach misunderstands the nature of our intergenerational relationships, thereby capturing either too much or too little about what is problematic about climate change. The paper finally proposes a way to think about intergenerational justice that avoids the pitfalls of the traditional theories and can explain what is wrong with perpetuating climate change.
This article discusses obstacles to overcoming dangerous climate change. It employs an account of dangerous climate change that takes climate change and climate change policy as dangerous if it imposes avoidable costs of poverty prolongation. It then examines plausible accounts of the collective action problems that seem to explain the lack of ambition to mitigate. After criticizing the merits of two proposals to overcome these problems, it discusses the pledge and review process. It argues that pledge and review possesses the virtues of encouraging broad participation and of providing a procedural safeguard for the right of sustainable development. However, given the perceptions of the marginal short term costs of mitigation, pledge and review is unlikely, at least initially, to issue in an agreement to make deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Because there is no rival approach that seems likely to better instantiate the two virtues, pledge and review may be the best available policy for mitigation. Moreover, recent economic research suggests that the co-benefits of mitigation may be greater than previously assumed and that the costs of renewable energy may be less than previously calculated. This would radically undermine claims that the short term mitigation costs necessarily render mitigation irrational and produce collective action problems. Given the circumstances, pledge and review might be our best hope to avoid dangerous climate change.
In cases in which there is the possibility of massive human losses, the threshold likelihood of their occurrence, and the non-excessive costs of their prevention, we ought to act now. This is all the more definitely the case because it may well be that this is the time-of-last-opportunity to head off one or more potential disasters, all of which may still be preventable by sufficiently rapid reductions in carbon emissions from the combustion of fossil fuel. It is unfair that the present generation should incur as heavy a burden as it does of seizing the last opportunity for prevention of disasters like large sea-level rises, but the unfairness is not sufficient to make the burden unreasonable to bear, especially since it is not in fact as heavy as often believed.
However far we are from either in practice, basic global and intergenerational justice, including climate change mitigation, are taken to be theoretically compatible. If population grows as predicted, this could cease to be the case. This paper asks whether that tragic legacy can now be averted without hard or even tragic choices on population policy. Current generations must navigate between: a high-stakes gamble on undeveloped technology; violating human rights; demanding unbearable sacrifices of the already badly off; institutional unfairness across adults; institutional unfairness across children; failing to protect children’s basic interests; and threatening the autonomy of the family. We are not yet forced to choose between bequeathing a tragic choice and making one, by adopting basically unjust measures. However, even the remaining options present a morally hard choice. The fact we face it is yet another damning indictment on the combined actions and collective failures of the global elite.
Climate justice
(2015)
Global Governance ist in: Klingt neuartig, global ist eigentlich auch alles und wer will sich schon vorwerfen lassen, noch im „methodologischen Nationalismus“ verhaftet zu sein? Dies ist überspitzt formuliert, doch wie sich zeigte nicht ganz unberechtigt. Nichtsdestotrotz waren die OrganisatorInnen des ersten Weltkongresses der International Association of Political Science Students (IAPSS) wohl selbst überrascht als zur Tagung mit dem Titel „The Limits of Global Governance“ rund 200 Anmeldungen von Studierenden kamen. In Thessaloniki, der europäischen Jugendhauptstadt 2014, wurde vier Tage über Global Governance debattiert und in den insgesamt sieben studentischen Panels, zahlreichen Vorträgen von etablierten WissenschaftlerInnen und weiteren Veranstaltungen zeigte sich vor allem die Vielfalt und Breite des Themas. Wir werden daher im Folgenden Schlaglichter auf interessante Veranstaltungen und Inhalte werfen und abschließend ein kritisch-konstruktives Fazit der Tagung ziehen.
Esta contribución intenta recuperar la versión crítica del concepto de "industria cultural" frente a su empleo afirmativo o su rechazo precipitado. Esto se hace señalando primero lo que no es industria cultural y presentando las falsas alternativas. Después se analiza lo que es industria cultural y para ello se identifican los elementos centrales que la definen. Finalmente se desarrolla una adecuada actualización, que será presentada en el último apartado por medio de algunos ejemplos.
Contemporary closed circuits – subversive dialogues : artistic strategies against surveillance
(2010)
In the past years surveillance, especially visual surveillance systems, have entered our cities and streets on a large scale. In my hometown Frankfurt/Main, the city centre and traffic-hubs have become zones under intensive surveillance. Over 120 cameras are installed at the central station, over 2,000 at the airport. In such highly surveilled places it is impossible to remain unobserved. The extent of surveillance in the United Kingdom and the USA offers a glance into the future. In these countries visual surveillance systems have spread into the farthest corners of cities and villages and into the privacy of their inhabitants.
This development calls for artistic endeavours which examine the phenomenon and raise people’s awareness of CCTV. Subversive strategies have to be developed which counter the inherent power relations of surveillance systems and foster self-confident, active behaviour towards the instruments of control.
The ongoing artistic project, Contemporary Closed Circuits – Subversive Dialogues, examines practices of contemporary visual surveillance. The works explore possibilities of interaction with and subversion of systems of observation. Most of the works were produced during the past three years as an artistic final thesis at Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany.
International politics is characterized by a lack of women. The few women holding high political positions are more likely to be criticized and judged based upon, what the author calls, ‘the construction of masculinity in international relations’. Tracing the origin and logic of this construction, the article critiques the dominant theories of international relations (namely, realism and liberalism) and argues for the aptness of a radical feminist social constructivist approach to the study of international politics. The article also illuminates the strong focus on men and men’s perspectives of these influential mainstream theories on their conception and interpretation of war. An examination of the concept of war reveals how masculinity and femininity are portrayed on matters of war and national security and what side effects this has on women in politics, particularly women with political positions.