Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (75) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (75)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (75)
Keywords
- Arbeitsverhältnisse (5)
- Globalisierung (4)
- Prekarität (4)
- Finance (3)
- Global Financial Class (3)
- Globale Finanzklasse (3)
- Globalization (3)
- Pierre Bourdieu (3)
- Transnational Capitalist Class (3)
- Vertrauen (3)
Institute
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (75) (remove)
This paper1 investigates changes in the domestic work sector when passing from the informal to the formal labor market. The issue is explored within the context of the housework voucher policy (titres-services), which allows households to officially purchase weekly housework services from an authorized agency, through vouchers. This contribution has therefore a twofold focus: observing changes in labor market dynamics and investigating workers’ perception of this change. In order to discuss these issues, I will firstly look at the step from informal to formal labor market through two aspects: ethnic niches and individual labor dynamics – two bedrocks of Brussels domestic work market. Then, I will analyze workers’ personal experiences when acquiring a declared job in the voucher system.
Analyzing objective and subjective changes, a entral question of this article is to which extent the switch to the housework voucher system can bring empowerment to domestic workers. The sector work quality, in objective and subjective terms, has improved mainly by the setting of rules and by allowing workers to enjoy labor rights and a work status. The formal market dynamics of the housework voucher system remain, however, profoundly ethicized and marked by women’s presence, as was/is the shadow market.
The article shows that workers’ understanding of the transition from an informal to a formal sector is largely a result of their previous experiences and social position, mainly regarding migration status. This change will be thus much more assertive for workers who had their migrant status regularization and work formalization processes concomitantly, demonstrating that the most empowering shift is the one of acquiring papers, and not of entering declared work.
Over the last three decades, countries across the Andean region have moved toward legal recognition of indigenous justice systems. This turn toward legal pluralism, however, has been and continues to be heavily contested. The working paper explores a theoretical perspective that aims at analyzing and making sense of this contentious process by assessing the interplay between conflict and (mis)trust. Based on a review of the existing scholarship on legal pluralism and indigenous justice in the Andean region, with a particular focus on the cases of Bolivia and Ecuador, it is argued that manifest conflict over the contested recognition of indigenous justice can be considered as helpful and even necessary for the deconstruction of mistrust of indigenous justice. Still, such conflict can also help reproduce and even reinforce mistrust, depending on the ways in which conflict is dealt with politically and socially. The exploratory paper suggests four proposition that specify the complex and contingent relationship between conflict and (mis)trust in the contested negotiation of pluralist justice systems in the Andean region.
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.
This paper challenges widespread assumptions in trust research according to which trust and conflict are opposing terms or where trust is generally seen as a value. Rather, it argues that trust is only valuable if properly justified, and it places such justifications in contexts of social and political conflict. For these purposes, the paper suggests a distinction between a general concept and various conceptions of trust, and it defines the concept as a four-place one. With regard to the justification of trust, a distinction between internal and full justification is introduced, and the justification of trust is linked to relations of justification between trusters and trusted. Finally, trust in conflict(s) emerges were such relations exist among the parties of a conflict, often by way of institutional mediation.
In the ‘age of transnationalization’, spatial mobility is highly valued as a resource and accordingly ‘sedentariness’ is often symbolically devalued. Migration between Poland and Germany (mainly from Poland to Germany) has a century-long tradition. Not only has it yielded the emergence of a dense transnational social space, but is also considered as a re-enactor of cultural traits and symbolic meanings. Spatial mobility is tied to notions of social mobility and to projects of life-making. Since legal restrictions for Polish migrants seeking to work and settle in Germany have vanished, the quest for ‘normalcy’ has enhanced and pressures towards even more migration have increased. I argue that symbolic meanings of mobility are decisive for hierarchies in transnational social spaces. I have put main emphasize on families’ practices of caring for and caring about each other: the first being more a physical or material activity, while the latter is a more symbolic and emotional one. The interviews reveal that people draw multiple differentiations between migrant populations in terms of their migration reasons as well as between the mobile and the immobile. Those differentiations are embedded in the distinct feature of the transnational social space between Poland and Germany with assumed differences in terms of ‘modernity’. At the end the symbolic meanings of mobility also help explain the puzzle of why the emigration rates from Poland are constantly high, although Poland is a comparatively wealthy country.
The sixth sanction package of the European Union in the context of the aggression against Ukraine excludes Sberbank, the largest Russian bank, from the SWIFT network. The increasing use of SWIFT as a tool for sanctions stimulates the rollout of alternative payment information systems by the governments of Russia and China. This policy white paper informs about the alternatives at hand, as well as their advantages and disadvantages. Careful reflection about these issues is particularly important, given the call for an “Economic Article 5” tabled for the next NATO meeting. Finally, the white paper highlights the need for institutional reforms, if policymakers decide to return SWIFT to the status of a global public good after the war.
The article studies civil wars and trust dynamics from two perspectives. It looks, first, at rebel governance during ongoing armed conflict and, second, at mass mobilisation against the regime in post-conflict societies. Both contexts are marked by extraordinarily high degrees of uncertainty given continued, or collective memory of, violence and repression.
But what happens to trust relations under conditions of extreme uncertainty? Intuitively, one would assume that trust is shaken or even substantially eroded in such moments, as political and social orders are questioned on a fundamental level and threaten to collapse. However, while it is true that some forms of trust are under assault in situations of civil war and mass protests, we find empirical evidence which suggests that these situations also give rise to the formation of other kinds of trust. We argue that, in order to detect and explain these trust dynamics in contexts of extreme uncertainty, there should be more systematic studies of: (a) synchronous dynamics between different actors and institutions which imply trust dynamics happening simultaneously, (b) diachronous dynamics and the sequencing of trust dynamics over several phases of violent conflict or episodes of contention, as well as long-term structural legacies of the past. In both dimensions, microlevel relations, as well as their embeddedness in larger structures, help explain how episodes of (non-)violent contention become a critical juncture for political and social trust.
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.
Der Beitrag bietet eine Einführung in das Thema „Vertrauen als Topos der Plattformregulierung“. Dazu wird in einem ersten Schritt das allgemeine Verhältnis zwischen dem sozialen Tatbestand „Vertrauen“ und dem Recht als das einer komplementären, wechselseitigen Wirkungsverstärkung beschrieben. Im Hinblick auf die vertrauensfördernde Rolle des Rechts wird in einem zweiten Schritt zwischen der Funktion des Vertrauens bzw. der Vertrauenswürdigkeit als Tatbestandselement einer Vorschrift und den hieran geknüpften Rechtsfolgen unterschieden. Auf der Basis dieser Grundlagen gibt der Aufsatz in einem dritten Schritt einen Überblick über Bezugnahmen auf „Vertrauen“ in der deutschen und europäischen Plattformregulierung seit 2015. Hierzu zählen sektorale Regelungen gegen Hasskriminalität und Desinformation sowie zum Schutz des Urheberrechts, die 2022 in den horizontal angelegten Digital Services Act mündeten, der ein insgesamt „vertrauenswürdiges Online-Umfeld“ gewährleisten soll. Viertens stellt der Beitrag ein abstrakt-analytisches Konzept des Vertrauens vor, das sich gut zur Analyse der aufgezählten Vertrauensbeziehungen und ihrer rechtlichen Regelungen eignet. Ein abschließender Ausblick deutet die Proliferation des Vertrauenstopos als Ausdruck einer Vertrauenskrise im digitalen Zeitalter. Die erstrebte Vertrauenswürdigkeit des Online-Umfelds bildet ein normatives Minimum, das über gesetzliche Verhaltenspflichten und Privilegien für vertrauenswürdige Akteure der Zivilgesellschaft erreicht werden soll. Ob dies gelingt und überhaupt wünschenswert ist, ist freilich offen. Die juristische Auseinandersetzung mit dem Topos des Vertrauens in der Digital- und Plattformregulierung hat gerade erst begonnen.
Mit Blick auf die liberale Theorie der Internationalen Beziehungen wird die Bedeutung von Medieninformation für außenpolitische Präferenzbildungsprozesse beleuchtet. Am Beispiel der Golfkrise 1990 und des Golfkrieges 1991 zeigt sich, dass von einer "frei deliberierenden" demokratischen Öffentlichkeit in den USA nicht unbedingt die Rede sein kann. Vielmehr bediente sich die Exekutive einer ausgefeilten "Medien(kriegs)politik", um den medialen Diskurs zu dominieren und die Meinungsbildung zu steuern. Dieser Befund stellt eine Herausforderung für die liberale Theorie dar: Wenn eine demokratische Öffentlichkeit nicht über ausgewogene Informationen verfügt, kann mit Blick auf militärische Gewalteinsätze nur eingeschränkt von demokratischer Kontrolle gesprochen werden. Ein amerikanischer Präsident, der mit seiner Medienpolitik den öffentlichen Diskurs über den Einsatz militärischer Gewalt dominieren kann, verfügt offensichtlich über größere Handlungsspielräume nach innen und außen, als die liberale Theorie bisher angenommen hat.